ffi 


I 


lySsPVfff 


THE  POPE  Ai  IRELAND: 


CONTAINING  


NEWLY-DISCOVERED  HISTORICAL  FACTS  CONCERNING  THE  FORGED  BULLS 


ATTRIBUTED      TO  


POPES  ADRIAN  IV.  +  ALEXANDER  III. 


—  TOGETHER    WITH    A    SKETCH    OF  — 


THE  UNION  EXISTING  BETWEEN  THE  CATHOLIC  CHURCH^IRELAND 


FROM 


THE     TWELFTH     TO     THE     NINETEENTH     CENTURY. 


BY      STEPHEN      J.      MoOORMICK 

EDITOR  OF  THE  SAN  FRANCISCO  "  MONITOR  "    V   ' 


SAN  FRANCISCO,    CALIFORNIA  : 
A.     WALDTEUFEL.     PUBLISHER 

BENZIGER     BROTHERS, 
NEW  YOBK.  CINCINNATI.  CHICAGO. 

1889. 


COPYBIGHTKD.       ALL       BIGHTS       BK8ERVED. 


TD 

PDPE     LED     XIII,  , 

The  Faithful   and  AffEctionatE 

FRIEND     DF    THE     IRISH    FEDPLE 

in 

EvEry  LegitimatE  Struggle  tn  Dhtain 
their  National  FrEEdnm, 

THIS     BDDK 
is  mast    RsspEctfully  ^  AffEctinnately 

LlEdicatEd 
As  a  Trihute  ni   HamagE 

and  a 
of  Filial 


P  R  E_F^\  C  E. 

When  a  few  of  the  articles  which  form  a  great  portion  of  the  chapters  in 
this  volume  first  appeared  in  the  columns  of  the  San  Francisco  MONITOR,  it 
was  suggested  that  such  historical  matter  was  well  worthy  of  being  placed  in 
book  form  so  as  to  give  it  a  permanency  which  it  otherwise  could  not  acquire. 
The  suggestion,  coming  as  it  did  from  many  revered  friends,  has  been  acted  en, 
and  in  this  way  the  public  is  placed  in  the  possession  of  the  only  volume  in 
the  English  language  which  is  devoted  exclusively  to  defending  the  Popes  and 
the  Irish  people  against  the  aspersions  of  both  ancient  and  modern  enemies. 

Viewing  the  present  work  in  this  aspect,  the  author  hopes  that  he  has 
added  at  least  something  to  the  general  stock  of  literature  and  thrown  a  great 
deal  of  light  upon  a  subject  which  has  hitherto  been  dealt  with  only  in  a 
fugitive,  transitory  and  superficial  manner. 

A  writer  in  the  Irish  Ecclesiastical  Record,  alluding  to  the  Bulls  attributed 
to  Popes  Adrian  and  Alexander,  says :  "  This  question  is  now  and  again 
brought  forth  under  the  foolish  hope  of  weakening  in  the  minds  of  Catholics  their 
attachment  to  the  Holy  See." 

Doubtless  it  was  for  this  purpose  the  work  of  which  this  volume  is  a  re- 
view and  a  refutation,  was  issued.  But  we  are  proud  to  say  that  truth  has  been 
vindicated  and  error  crushed  in  the  following  pages.  We  have  procured  evidence 
from  sources  which  have  not  hitherto  been  known  to  the  general  reader,  and  we 
have  treated  the  subjects  under  discussion  in  as  extensive  a  manner  as  their 
importance  justified.  Some  persons  may  deem  it  strange  that  two  such  Papal 
Bulls  as  those  attributed  to  Popes  Adrian  and  Alexander  should  have  existed  in 
the  world  for  seven  hundred  years  without  having  been  proved  fictitious  and 
their  falsity  thoroughly  and  permanently  established.  But  in  this  respect,  to 
»ise  a  familiar  phrase,  "history  repeats  itself."  Like  the  Adrian  and  Alexander 
forgeries,  it  was  not  until  seven  centuries  of  controversy  had  been  indulged  in 
that  the  False  Decretals  of  Isadore  Mercator  were  finally  and  successfully  proved 
fictitious.  These  documents  first  came  into  prominence  in  the  middle  of  the 
ninth  century  and  they  were  received  with  credence  until  the  middle  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  when  public  faith  was  withdrawn  and  they  were  relegated  to 
the  museum  of  fictitious  literature. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  forgery  of  both  Papal  and  other  documents  was 
quite  common  in  the  twelfth  century.  Professor  Jungmann,  in  the  appendix  to 
the  fifth  volume  of  his  Dixscrtationes  Historian  Ecclesiastics,  says,  in  support  of 
the  opinion  of  those  who  hold  that  the  Bulls  attributed  to  Popes  Adrian  and 
Alexander  are  forgeries,  "it  is  well  known  from  history  that  everywhere  towards 
the  close  of  the  twelfth  century  there  were  forged  of  corrupted  Papal  Letters 
or  Diplomas.  That  such  was  the  case  frequently  in  England  is  inferred  from 
the  Letters  of  John  Sarisbiensis  and  of  others." 

Richard,    the  Prelate    who  succeeded  St.  Thomas  in  the    See  of   Canterbury, 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


commanded  all  the  Bishops  under  his  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  to  promulgate  in 
all  their  churches  the  punishment  of  excommunication  against  the  f>ublic  pest  of 
foryery.  So  says  Peter  Blessenais. 

In  the  time  of  Pope  Innocent  III.,  various  statutes  were  passed  against  this 
abominable  crime,  which  was  a  source  of  great  annoyance,  as  well  as  of  in- 
security, in  relation  to  all  important  official  documents  of  an  ecclesiastical  nature. 

In  the  present  age  of  the  world,  of  course,  it  is  easy  to  understand  that 
the  forgery  of  Papal  documents  has  been  rendered  an  impossibility  in  conse- 
quence of  the  vigilance  exercised  at  the  Vatican  as  well  as  from  the  fact  that 
the  printing  press  and  the  telegraph  would  soon  solve  any  doubts  concerning 
such  documents  if  they  were  suspected.  But  in  the  twelfth  century  no  such 
resources  were  available, — hence  apochryphal  documents  were  generally  accepted 
as  genuine  when  first  circulated,  and  in  this  way  a  great  deal  of  annoyance  was 
encountered  by  ecclesiastics. 

Within  the  past  few  years  efforts  have  been  made  in  nearly  every  English- 
speaking  section  of  the  world  where  Irish  people  congregated,  to  wean  them 
from  their  fidelity  to  the  Church  and  the  Pope  by  means  of  false  and  malicious  inven- 
tions regarding  the  attitude  assumed  by  Pope  Leo  XIII.,  towards  Ireland's 
struggles  for  political  supremacy  and  National  Home  Government. 

Thia  movement  was  made  with  the  view  to  "strike  the  Shepherd,"  so  that 
the  sheep  of  the  flock  of  Christ  might  be  dispersed.  But  in  order  that  truth 
might  prevail  over  error  and  malice  be  confuted  by  impartial  evidence,  the 
author  deemed  it  a  worthy  task  to  place  in  the  possession  of  the  reading  public 
all  the  principal  points  which  poisonous  literature  had  presented  in  antagonism 
to  the  Vicars  of  Christ,  and  then  to  bring  forth  the  antidote  in  the  shape  of 
such  facts  as  impartial  historians  furnished,  in  order  that  a  correct  knowledge  of 
the  historical  questions  under  discussion  might  be  clearly  acquired. 

A  great  deal  of  prejudice  has  been  engendered  in  the  public  mind  against 
both  the  Church  and  the  Pontiffs  by  reason  of  false  history  and  false  bio- 
graphies of  the  Popes  being  circulated  throughout  the  world,  and  left  to 
occupy  the  literary  field  without  any  contradiction  on  the  part  of  Catholic 
authors.  In  this  way  the  Church  and  the  Vicars  of  Christ  are  prejudged  and 
false  verdicts  are  found  against  both  even  by  Catholics  themselves,  who,  find- 
ing all  history  filled  with  calumnies  against  the  Church  and  her  Chief  Bishops, 
give  up  all  contest  in  despair,  and  finally  acquiesce  in  the  rancorous  false- 
hoods which  teach  untruth  in  the  pages  of  so  much  nineteenth-century  litera- 
ture. 

This  volume,  therefore,  the  author  humbly  hopes,  will  serve  to  stem  the  tide 
of  calumny  so  far  asj  concerns  the  Pope  and  the  Irish  people,  proving,  as  it 
does,  the  constant  fidelity  of  the  Irish  race  to  the  See  of  Rome,  as  well  as 
demonstrating  the  ready  [reciprocity  with  which  that  fidelity  was  recognized  by 
the  Roman  Pontiffs. 

The  foot-notes  and  references  introduced  into  the  volume  will  furnish  a 
key  to  Sthose  who  [desire  to  certify  the  proofs  the  author  adduces  or  the 
charges  he  makes— as  there  is  nothing  so  far  from  his  intention  as  to  strive 
to  gain  a  point  by  any  unfair^  line  of  argument.  For  this  reason,  therefore, 
he  has  taken  great  pains  not  to  introduce  his  own  ideas  to  such  an  extent 
as  to  shut  out  the  evidence  which  he  found  in  authors  of  reputation  and  stand- 


THE       1'01'K       AND      IRKLANb. 


ing,  knowing  full  well  that  auch  evidence  has  far  mor°  importance  and  weight 
in  the  estimation  of  all  reflecting  men  than  any  opinions  which  the  author 
might  a  lvai.ee,  if  su  h  opinions  were  unsupported  by  documentary  evidence. 

In  the  treatment  of  the  questions  which  have  arisen  between  the  enemies 
of  both  the  Pope  and  Ireland  during  the  past  decade  of  years,  the  author  has 
been  at  great  pains  to  procure  irrefutable  evidence,  so  as  to  establish  the 
truth  of  history  on  such  a  solid  basis  that  no  future  calumnies  against  the  char- 
acter of  the  Holy  Father  Leo  XIII.,  at  present  gloriously  reigning,  can  be 
brought  forward  without  being  liable  to  immediate  refutation  by  reference  to 
these  pages. 

All  the  efforts  of  the  author  have  been  directed  towards  clearing  away  the 
clouds  of  calumny  which  ancient  foes  and  modern  enemies  have  heaped  up 
against  both  Ireland  and  the  Pope — both  of  whom  are  looked  upon  by  the 
world  as  something  to  be  hated,  and  thus  both  share  in  the  glory  of  having 
earned  the  world's  animosity  in  consequence  of  their  steadfast  fidelity  to  God 
and  His  Church. 

Ireland  will  never  falter  in  her  Faith  nor  lose  her  renown  as  the  mother  of 
true  children  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  As  Pope  Leo  XIII.,  well  says  :  "Irish- 
men take  a  just  pride  in  being  called  Catholics— an  appellation  which,  according 
to  St  Augustine,  means  the  guardians  of  all  honor  and  uprightness,  the  fol- 
lowers of  all  equity  and  justice.  Let  them  fulfill  by  their  acts  all  that  this  word 
Catholic  implies ;  and  let  them,  while  vindicating  their  own  just  rights,  en- 
deavor to  be  indeed  all  that  their  name  suggests." 

By  such  a  course  of  conduct  will  the  cause  of  Ireland  prosper.  Erin  will 
succeed  in  securing  temporal  prosperity  without  the  sacrifice  of  Catholic  prin- 
ciple, and  then  indeed 

Fixed  as  fate  will  her  altars  stand  ; 

I'n changed  -like  God— her  Faith  ; 
Her  Church  will  like  her  mountains  stand 

Untouched  by  Time  or  hand  of  Death  ! 


.THE  POPE  AND  IRELAND, 


C  II  A  P  T  E  11     I . 

Preliminary  Considerations  Regarding  Judge  Mi  guire's  "  Ireland  and  the  Pope." 


A  Brief  History  of  Papal  Intrigues  a? »in*t  Irif>h 
Liberty  from  Adrian  IV.  to  Leo  XI IT.  By 
J  amea  G.  Maguire,  J  udije  of  the  Superior 
Court  of  San  Francisco,  California.  San 
Francisco  :  James  II.  Barry,  18S8. 


After  a  careful  perusal  of  this  volume, 
we  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  it  is  a 
bad  book,  published  through  bad  motives, 
and,  in  its  results,  it  is  far  more  likely  to 
recoil  disastrously  upon  the  head  of  its 
author  than  it  is  to  have  the  damaging  and 
demoralizing  affect  its  author's  animosity 
against  the  Vicar  of  Christ  intended. 

It  is  an  open  secret  that  the  author  of 
this  vicious  volume  is  a  great  admirer  of 
Dr.  McGlynn  and  Henry  George,  both  of 
whom  he  has  already  lauded  publicly, 
whilst,  at  the  same  time,  he  has  poured  the 
vials  of  his  wrath  upon  the  devoted  head 
of  Pope  Leo  XIII  as  their  enemy. 

Any  book  upon  "  Ireland  and  the  Pope," 
emanating  from  an  author  whose  mind  is 
a,  seething  cauldron  .of  passion  and  preju- 
dice combined,  must  naturally  be  looked 
upon  as  the  result  of  rancor,  and  hence  it 
can  possess  but  little  or  no  value  in  the 
esteem  of  men  who  want  to  read  the  truth  of 
history,  and  not  the  vaporings  of  individuals 
whose  minds  are  so  strongly  tainted  with 
vengeance  against  the  Pope  that  they  can- 
not permit  themselves  even  to  speak 
courteously  of  the  Pontiffs  whom  they  pre- 
sent to  their  readers  as  the  persecutors  of 
the  Irish  people,  and  as  the  barriers  which 
have  ever  been  stumbling  blocks  in  the 
way  of  Ireland's  independence. 

Had  this  bad  book  been  written  by  an 
open  and  avowed  Orangeman,  an  anti- 
Catholic  Calvinist,  or  an  ex-priest  who  had 
turned  Presbyterian,  its  Pope-slandering 
contents  and  its  many  misleading  and 


malicious  statements,  would  not  have  as- 
toni  hed  us  in  the  least.  But  being,  as  it 
is,  the  work  of  an  author  who  was  born, 
baptized,  and  brought  up  in  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  whose  position  on  the  Bench 
implies  a  decent  respect  for  all  aufhmity, 
both  civil  and  ecclesiastical,  then  indeed 
our  wonder  is  excited  that  James  G. 
Maguire  could  sully  his  Catholic  soul  and 
soil  the  ermine  of  his  high  judicial  position, 
by  placing  his  name  and  official  designation 
upon  the  title-page  of  a  book  that  is  be- 
neath criticism  as  a  literary  production, 
and  which  can  confer  no  honor  upon  either 
the  literary  or  the  judicial  reputation  of  the 
gentleman  who  generated  it. 

We  intend  to  review  t  ;  s  work  thwough- 
ly,  for  the  reason  fiat  it  involves  questions 
upon  which  "tho  truth,  the  whole  truth, 
and  nothing  but  the  truth,"  should  be 
known.  The  patriotic  impulses  of  many 
Catholic  Irishmen  very  often  leave  them 
liable  to  have  their  minds  filled  with  venom 
against  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  because  of  some 
fancied  wrong  (or  "  outrage"  as  Judge 
Maguire  would  call  it),  which  the  Popes  are 
said  to  have  perpetrated  in  the  past  or 
present  against  the  Irish  people;  and,  in 
order  to  avoid  such  a  calamity,  it  is  one 
of  the  most  important  duties  of  the  MONI- 
TOR to  place  before  its  readers  a  full,  fair 
and  candid  contradiction  of  just  such  in- 
sidious falsehoods  as  the  work  under  review 
contains. 

History  has  been  denned  as  "a  con- 
spiracy against  truth,"  and  in  no  instance  is 
this  definition  more  veracious  than  when  it 
embraces  within  its  scope  those  so  called 
"histories"  wherein  occur  any  reference  to 
the  Popes,  whose  characters  have  been 


10 


THE      POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


depicted  in  the  darkest  colors  by  hireling 
heretical  writers,  and  by  the  enemies  of  the 
Church,  for  no  other  cause  than  the  horrid 
hallucination  that  by  traducing  the  Head 
of  the  Church,  the  body  and  the  members 
would  also  suffer. 

Such  has  been  the  conduct  of  the  ca- 
lumniators of  the  Pontiffs  in  the  past,  and 
it  seems  that,  in  this  regard  at  least,  the 
world  has  not  improved,  for  the  work  before 
us,  when  contrasted  with  the  high  judicial 
position  of  its  author,  is  truly  "  a  conspir- 
acy against  truth,"  and  is  so  malignant 
in  its  misrepresentations,  and  so  disrespect- 
ful in  its  allusions  to  the  Pope,  that  it 
will  astonish  and  disgust  all  decent  people 
who  lose  their  time  in  turning  over  its  tur- 
gid pages. 


The  MONITOR  feels  sorry  for  the  position 
in  which  Judge  Maguire  has  placed  himself 
before  the  Catholic  body  at  large.  We 
have  not  even  the  scintillation  of  any  feel- 
ing of  animosity  towards  the  gentleman  for 
his  furious  but  foolish  attack  upon  the  Vicar 
of  Christ,  but  it  would  be  criminal  in  us 
as  a  Catholic  journalist  to  permit  a  poison- 
laden  publication  like  the  present  work 
to  be  circulated  all  over  this  country, 
without  exposing  the  falsehoods  which  fig- 
ure most  conspicuously  upon  its  pages. 
The  character  of  the  Vicar  of  Christ  is  dear 
to  every  Catholic,  and  the  author  whc 
imagines  that  he  can  publish  any  calumny 
he  pleases  against  the  Popes,  will  discover, 
to  his  sorrow  and  confusion-,  that  the  ques- 
tions he  has  so  dogmatically  decided  against 
the  Pontiffs,  have  another  side  to  them 
wherein  Truth  will  prevail  over  error,  and 
plain  facts  dominate  over  fanatical  fictions. 


The  first  ebulition  of  malice  which  the 
author  of  "  Ireland  and  the  Pope"  mani- 
fests, appears  in  the  "Dedication"  where 
he  alludes  to  the  Pope  as  a  "  foreign  poten- 
tate.''' Now,  as  one  who  was  educated 
under  Catholic  influences,  Judge  Maguire 
i»i<iht  to  have  known  that  the  Catholic 
people  all  over  the  world  repudiate  the 
idea  that  any  Pope — from  St.  Peter  to  Leo 
XIII.—  should  be  contemplated  under  the 
contemptuous  title  of  "a  foreign  potentate. " 


From  the  days  of  St.  Patrick,  the  Irish 
people  have  always  loved,  honored  and 
obeyed  the  Pope  as  their  spiritual  Father — 
after  God  their  best  and  most  reliable 
guide. 

It  is  now  about  fourteen  hundred  years 
since  St.  P.itrick  converted  the  Irish  peo- 
ple to  Christianity,  and  one  of  those  beau- 
tiful proverbs  known  as  Dicta  Sancti 
Patritii,  preserved  in  the  Book  of  Armagh, 
which  was  transcribed  in  the  year  807,  is  to 
the  following  effect  :  "Thanks  be  to  God," 
said  St.  Patrick,  speaking  of  the  conversion 
of  the  Irish  people  to  the  Catholic  faith, 
"  You  have  passed  from  the  kingdom  of 
Satan  to  the  city  of  God  ;  the  church  of 
the  Irish  is  a  church  of  Romans  ;  as  you  are 
children  of  Christ,  so  be  you  children  of 
Itome."  This  was  the  legacy  which  St. 
Patrick  left  to  those  whom  he  had  redeemed 
from  pagan  darkness  and  placed  under  the 
light  of  the  Cross.  The  Pope  represents 
the  Church  and  he  represents  Rome,  and 
when  any  writer  thinks  to  air  his  wrath 
by  styling  the  Pope  '•  a  foreign  poteutate,'' 
he  insults  all  Catholics  who— in  the 
language  of  St.  Patrick— are  not  only 
"children  of  Christ  but  also  children  of 
Rome." 

So  far  from  being  "a  foreign  potentate," 
the  Pope  of  Rome,  the  successor  of  St. 
Peter,  is,  in  the  estimation  of  every  dutiful 
Catholic,  the  chief  Pastor  who  holds  the 
title-deeds  of  the  love  and  loyalty  of  every 
Catholic  "from  Greenland's  icy  mountains 
to  Africa's  burning  sands."  The  whole 
world  is  the  Pope's  spiritual  domain.  He  is 
enshrined  in  the  hearts  of  the  Catholic 
people  of  every  land  as  the  Apostolic  Lord 
and  Father  of  Fathers,  the  Shepherd  of  the 
Fold  of  Christ,  who  hath  charge  of  the 
lambs  and  the  sheep,  so  that  they  may  not 
wander  into  the  poisonous  pastures  which 
the  world  has  prepared  for  their  temporal 
and  spiritual  ruin.  No  metes  or  geographi- 
cal bounds,  therefore,  circumscribe  the 
paternal  influence  of  the  Pope.  To  the 
faithful  he  is  ever  their  dearly-beloved 
Father,  and  in  calling  the  Vicar  of  Christ 
"a  foreign  potentate,"  the  author  of  this 
volume  only  vents  his  spleen  whilst  he  tar- 
nishes the  fair  fame  of  his  Christian  edu- 
cation. 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


11 


The  oliject  for  which  this  book   is  written 
is  set  forth  in  the  Preface  thus  :     "  To  show 
the  "  wrong  and  injustice"  of  papal  inter- 
ference with  the  Irish  people,  and  to  point 
out  the  necessity  and  the  patriotic   duty    of 
firmly  and  constantly  rejecting  and  resisting 
every  political  edict,  issued   by  a  pope  or 
inquisition   respecting    Irish    affairs."     The 
author,  however,  seems  to  have  very  con- 
veniently   forgotten   that   there   is   no   in- 
stance on  record  where  the  Catholic  Bishops, 
priests  or  people  of  Ireland  ever  complained 
of  any  "  wrong  and  injustice"  which  they 
suffered  through  "  papal  interference. "   And 
the  captious  critic  of  the   Vicar   of  Christ 
seems  also  to  have  forgotten  that  "  political 
edicts"  do   not  come    within   the  Province 
of  the  Pope,    save   where   the  question   of 
faith  and  morals   is  involved.     The   whole 
Catholic  world  admits  that  the  voice  of  the 
Pope  is  the   Supreme  law   in   all   matters 
appertaining  to  faith  and  morals,  but  Judge 
Maguire,  of    the   Superior  Court    of    San 
Francisco,  seems  to   have  been  so  anxious 
to  punish  the  Pope  by  placing  him  in  the 
pillory  of    Irish  politics,    so  as  to  exhibit 
him  for  public  execration,  that  he  acts  the 
part  of  judge,  jury  and  public  executioner  ! 
Every  man,  even  if  he  enjoys  what  Judge 
Maguire  so  elegantly   describes   in   his  al- 
lusion to  the  Pope  as  "  the  unenviable,  not 
to  say  infamous  distinction  of  being  danger- 
ous only  to  those  who  confide  in  him,"  is 
entitled  to  a  full,  free   and   impartial  trial 
at  the  hands  of  his  peers.     This   trial,   the 
MONITOR  has  resolved  the  Pope  shall  have, 
eVen    though    the  case  has  been    already 
prejudged    and    passed  upon    without  the 
defendant  being  even  cited  to    appear    in 
court!     "Fair    play  is  a    jewel,"    Judge, 
and    neither    the  Pope   nor  the     Catholic 
Church  asks  more  from  any  man  or  body 
of  men.     But  the  Pope  and  the  Church  do 
dread  calumny.     They  have  reason  to  fear 
the  baneful  effects    of    all    bad    literature, 
whether  sensuous  or  sensational,   malicious 
or  misleading,   because  the  people   of  the 
world    are   always  more  ready  to  believe 
evil  reports  of  any   person,    whether  Pope 
or  pauper,  than  they  are  to  accept  the  plain, 
substantial  statements   of  mere  matter-of- 
fact  events  in  the  lives  of  men  about  whom 
the  world  concerns  itself. 


For  thif,  and  other  cogent  reasons,  it  is 
only  proper  that  "Ireland  and  the  Pope" 
should  be  thoroughly  dissected,  so  as  to 
prove  to  the  world  that  the  Pope  has  "a 
case  in  court"  which  contains  irrefutable 
testimony  on  his  side  whereby  to  secure  a 
verdict  of  acquittal  against  the  charges 
contained  in  Judge  Maguire's  indictment' 
"  One  story  is  good,"  Judge,  "until  the 
other  is  told."  And  now  that  the  MONITOR 
has  read  your  decision,  we  hope  your  Honor 
will  read  the  rebutting  testimony  which 
these  columns  will  present  during  the  next 
few  weeks,  in  defence  of  one  who  stands 
pre-eminent  among  Christians,  and  who 
shall  never  be  hounded  to  death  unheard, 
so  long  as  the  MONITOR'S  guns  can  carry  a 
shot  into  the  ambush  of  his  enemies, 

In  the  course  of  his  Preface  to  "  Ireland 
and  the  Pope,"  the  judicial  author  poses  as  a 
philanthropist  who  hates  to  pitch  mud  at  the 
Holy  Father,  because  he  may  miss  his  aim 
and  some  of  it  may  bespatter  the  Catholic 
Church  !  Very  considerate,  indeed,  Judge; 
the  sentiment  does  you  great  honor,  and  in 
order  that  the  readers  of  the  MONITOR  may 
not  be  kept  in  ignorance  of  this  most  gra- 
cious condescension  on  your  part,  we  print 
the  precious  and  peerless  paragraph  in  full  ', 

"  I  am  painfully  aware  of  the  extreme  diffi- 
culty if  not  impossibility,  of  exposing  and  con- 
demning the  political  errors  and  faults  of  one 
who  is  the  spiritual  head  of  a  church,  without 
working  some  injury  to  the  church  which  he 
represents." 

We  have  purposely  italicized  those  por- 
tions of  the  foregoing  paragraph  which  will 
cause  Catholics  to  smile  serenely — even  at 
the  expense  of  being  guilty  of  contempt  of 
Court !  Judging  from  the  above  extract,  it 
is  not  unfair  to  say  that  the  judicial  power 
of  the  author  of  "  Ireknd  and  the  Pope," 
is  not  confined  to  such  civil  or  criminal 
cases  as  may  come  before  his  court,  but  he 
has  elected  himself  as  Most  Magnificent 
Censurer- General  of  Popes,  Cardinals  and 
Roman  Congregations !  Well  might  this 
worthy  legal  but  rather  illogical  luminary 
say  : 

No  pent  up  Civil  Code  confines  our  powers 
We're  Pontiff  of  Pontiff*.    The  earth  is  ours ! 

Catholics    will    doubtless    remark     with 
admiration    the    deep    feeling    of     sorrow 


12 


THE       POPE       AND       IUKI.AXD. 


wlii.-h  JuJge  Maguire  evinces,  when  he 
contemplates  the  vast  amount  of  injury 
whidi  his  wonderful  book  is  destined  to 
can-"**  to  "  a  church"  over  which  the  Pope 
presides.  How  very  kind  and  considerate 
<•(  *»  eminent  and  erudite  a  modern  Jupiter? 
Hi*  power  is  so  great  that  he  could  crush 
tlic  Church  of  God  entirely  out  of  existence 
l»-i!i-:ith  the  Juggernaut  of  his  gigantic 
j  i'1  ueship,  but  he  kindly  vouchsafes  to  ex- 
j>tv*s  his  sorrow  that  the  Church  cannot 
is -ape  "some  injury"  from  the  powerful 
indictment  which  his  Honor  has  brought 
against  her  ! 

And,  right  here,  if  it  would  not  trespass 
t«o  much  on  the  patience  of  the  Court,  we 
would  like  to  ask  the  author  of  ''Ireland 
and  the  Pope,"  by  what  Code  of  Christian 
law  his  Honor  came  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  Pope  presided  over  '•  a  (  hvrch"  and  not 
the  Church?  Is  there  some  Christian  sta- 
tute hidden  away  in  the  Superior  Court  of 
San  Francisco  which  sets  forth  as  an  un- 
deniable fact  that  Christ  established  aiore 
than  one  Church  ?  Or  is  this  phrase  '*  a 
church,"  merely  a  ruse  by  which  it  is  sought 
to  belittle  the  One,  Holy,  Catholic  and 
Apostolic  Church,  and  to  make  its  mountains 
i-f  Faith  and  Truth  and  Apostolicity  and 
Authority  appear  only  the  same  small  mole- 
hills as  are  Methodism,  Mormonism  and 
MiGlynnism  ?  Ah  !  Judge,  your  satire  ill 
becomes  your  position,  howevet  we  1  it  n  ay 
coincide  with  th*  cause  which  you  champion. 
"  Thou  art  Peter,"  said  our  Divine  Saviour 
tn  the  first  Pope,  "and  upon  thee  I  will  build 
My  Church,"  and  until  these  words  are  re- 
Vuked  by  the  Second  Person  of  the  Blessed 
Trinity  Who  said  them,  Catholics  will  be 
compelled  to  accept  them  as  even  "higher 
law"  than  any  judgment  upon  this  question, 
even  though  it  should  emanate  from  "  the 
Superior  Court  of  San  Francisco,  California !" 

It  may  be  well,  also,  to  call  the  attention 
of  the  author  of  "  Ireland  and  the  Pope"  to 
the  fact  that  he  must  either  accept  as  a  Cath- 
olic the  Creed  wherein  the  Church  is  de- 
clared to  be  the  "  One,  Holy,  Catholic  and 
Apostolic  Church,"  or  he  must  reject  the 
Creed  and  thus  stand  before  the  world  as  an 
open  apostate.  "  He  that  shall  deny  Me 
before  men,"  says  our  Blessed  Redeemer, 
"I  will  also  deny  him  before  My  Father 


Who  is  in  Heaven,"  and  when  J:idge  Ma- 
guire  publicly  proclaims  his  belief  that  the 
Church  of  God  is  only  a  church  among  many 
churches,  then  indeed,  has  he  denied  God 
before  all  men  ! 

So  far  as  the  future  of  the  Church  is  con- 
cerned, in  relation  to  this  wonderful  book, 
the  MONITOR  desires,  in  the  most  cordial 
and  charitable  manner  possible,  to  assure 
Judge  Maguire  that  he  need  neither  fret 
nor  fume,  wonder  nor  worry  over  the 
amount  of  "injury"  which  his  unfortunate 
book  will  cause  to  the  Church.  The  quantity 
and  quality  of  '•  chaff  '  which  he  has  cast  at 
the  Church  and  the  Popp,  will  all  have  been 
blown  to  the  four  winds  of  Heaven  long  be- 
fore Judge  Maguire  will  have  emerged  from 
the  fog  of  odium  in  which  he  has  enveloped 
.himself  through  his  unfortunate  literary 
venture. 


Further  along  in  his  Preface  the  bitter 
critic  of  the  Chief  Pastor  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  assures  his  readers  that  "it  is  not 
his  fault  if  the  spiritual  heads  of  the  Cath- 
olic Church  claimed  also  to  be,  by  divine 
right,  temporal  rulers,  theoretically,  over  all 
nations,  and  in  terrible  reality  over  Ireland." 
DJ  not  be  alarmed,  Judge  ;  nobody  will  ever 
think  of  holding  you  accountable  for  any 
shortcomings  of  the  Popes  !  God  knows  you 
have  sins  enough  of  your  own  to  be  respon- 
sible for  without  saddling  your  juJicial 
shoulders  with  the  peccadillos  and  the  "  po- 
litical edicts"  of  the  Popes  !  Besides,  it 
would  be  radically  in  opposition  to  the  Civil 
Code  of  California  to  hold  an  eminent  and 
erudite  American  citizen  responsible  for  the 
crimes  of  a  foi-eigu  poteidute  !  The  idea  is 
perfectly  preposterous,  and  we  hasten  to  as- 
sure Judge  Maguire  that  so  far  as  the  MON- 
ITOK  is  concerned,  not  one  of  its  readers 
shall  ever  harbor  such  a  horrible  thought  as 
that  which  seems  to  harrow  fearful  furrows 
in  the  otherwise  serene  soul  of  the  Most 
High  and  Mighty  Censor-General  of  God's 
Vicegerent  on  Earth  ! 

Irrespective  entirely  of  these  reasons, 
it  is  also  a  well  and  widely  known  fact  that 
throughout  the  past  nineteen  centuries  the 
Popes  have  always,  everywhere,  and  under 
even  the  most  adverse  circumstances,  man- 
aged to  "  hold  their  own"  against  all  their 


THE       POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


13 


assailant?,  whether  the  assaults  came  from 
heretic  or  apostate,  king  or  kaiser,  soldier 
or  statesman  In  every  conflict  with  the 
world  the  Pope  has  always  triumphed  in  the 
end.  and  so  will  it  be  in  your  case,  Judge  ; 
the  Pope  will  be  loved,  revered  and  vener- 
ated by  hundreds  of  millions  of  Catholic 
hearts  long  after  the  fly-speck  with  which 
you  have  >ried  to  deface  the  Palace  of  Peter 
shall  have  been  washed  away  completely  by 
the  tears  of  a  prodigal's  repentance  ! 


Further  on  in  his  Preface,  the  candid 
author  of  "  Ireland  and  the  Pope"  tells  us 
that  he  speaks  "  neither  as  a  friend  nor  as 
an  enemy  of  the  Catholic  religion,"  and  yet, 
dear  Judge,  it  is  well  for  all  Christians  to 
bear  in  mind  that  Almighty  God  has  said  : 
"  He  that  is  not  with  Me,  is  against  Me ; 
and  he  that  gathereth  not  with  Me,  scat- 
tereth."  The  Pope,  his  Honor  will  please 
to  remember,  represents  Almighty  God  in  the 
eyes  of  Catholics,  and  he  that  is  not  the 
friend  of  Christ's  Church  is  always  ranked 
among  her  foes  !  There  is  no  middle  course, 
dear  Judge.  The  Divine  law  is  plain  :  He 
that  is  not  the  friend  of  God  is  Hia  enemy. 
You  can  take  which  horn  of  the  dilemma 
you  please,  although  the  close  perusal  of 
your  unfortunate  book  would  lead  us  to  be- 
lieve that  you  have  allied  yourself  with  the 
worst  enemies  the  Church,  the  Pope,  and 
the  Irish  Catholic  people  have  to  contend 
with  — the  class  that  would  steal  Catholic 
faith  from  fervent  Irish  souls,  under  the 
delusive  plea  of  making  them  purer  Irish 
patriots ! 


Alluding  to  just  such  books  as  the  volume 
before  us,  an  eminent  Irish  Prelate  said 
some  years  ago,  that  they  were  written  "not 
out  of  any  love  for  our  poor  country  or  of 
historic  truth,"  but  they  proceeded  mainly 
from  people  who  desired  to  proclaim  their 
hostility  to  the  Sovereign  Pontiff  and  from 
the  vain  hope  that  their  exaggerated  state- 
ments, might  in  some  way  weaken  the  chord 
of  Christian  faith  which  binds  the  Irish  peo- 
ple to  Rome.  Others  who  were  the  pre- 
cursors of  Judge  Maguire  in  his  attacks  on 
the  Popes,  found  nothing  but  "chaff"  in  the 
hopper  when  they  threshed  out  the  crop  of 


anti-Catholic  literature  they  had  sown,  and 
so  will  it  be  when  his  Honor  looks  around 
for  the  '•  injury"  which  he  egotistically  im- 
agines his  book  will  accomplish.  He  will  be 
both  chagrined  and  astonished  to  find  the 
old  Church  still  foremost  in  the  world,  with- 
out a  dent  in  her  sides,  a  rent  in  her  sails, 
or  a  spot  to  show  that  the  malice  of  man 
has  cast  even  a  thimbleful  of  mud  at  the 
mystic  body  wherein  Christ  dwelleth  for 
ever  ! 


Further  on  in  his  Preface,  the  ardent  au- 
thor of  "  Ireland  and  the  Pope"  says  his  de- 
s  re  is  "to  assist  in  raising  my  father's 
countrymen  and  my  own  kinsmen  above 
that  groveling  fear  of  the  Pope,  which  makes 
so  many  of  them  nerveless  when  he  ftriJces 
a  blow  at  their  country  and  their  race." 
This  desire  on  the  part  of  his  Honor,  how- 
ever, is  entirely  uncalled  for,  inasmuch  as 
no  good  Catholic  fears  the  Pope.  The  Pope 
is  only  feared  by  those  who  look  upon  him 
as  "a  foreign  potentate."  Catholics  love 
him  as  the  Father  of  all  the  Faithful  and 
they  venerate  him  as  the  Vicar  of  Christ. 
Fear  only  enters  their  souls  when  they  have 
sinned  against  the  laws  of  God  or  the  pre- 
cepts of  the  Church,  but  so  long  as  they  are 
not  culprits  in  the  sight  of  God  they  look 
upon  the  Pope  as  their  Father  ;  they  love 
him  and  pray  for  him,  so  that  his  reign  over 
the  Church  may  be  productive  of  peace  and 
good-will  among  all  Christian  peoples. 

The  Popes,  may  it  please  the  Court, 
have  never  yet  struck  a  blow  at  Ireland  or 
at  the  Irish  race.  Anti-Irish  authors  have 
said  so,  and  anti-Catholic  critics  of  the  Popes 
have  purposely  adopted  and  circulated  the 
calumny.  In  like  manner  malicious  men 
mention  "the  female  Pontiff  Joan,"  to 
this  day,  but  this  fable,  like  many  others, 
has  been  dissipated  from  the  minds  of  all  in- 
tellectual men  by  the  light  of  recent  histori- 
cal revelations  which  were  not  known  to 
those  who  lived  in  past  generations. 

It  may  also  be  judicious  to  remind  Ju  Jge 
Maguire  that  there  exists  a  very  old  saying 
which  runneth  thus  :  "  Those  who  eat  the 
Pope  die  of  the  Pope,"  and  such  has  been 
the  fate  of  many  men  far  more  notable  in 
the  world  than  even  a  judge  of  the  Superior 
Court  of  San  Francisco.  The  "injury" 


14 


THE       1'OI'E       AND      ICELAND. 


therefore,  which  will  accrue  from  '*  Ireland 
and  the  Pope,"  will  be  quite  insignificant, 
as  most  of  the  work  is  compiled  from  au- 
thors who  are  neither  reliable  nor  respec- 
table, and,  besides,  Catholics  have  the  assur- 
ance of  the  Son  of  God  that  not  even  the 
Gates  of  Bell  shall  prevail  against  that 
Church  which  Judge  Maguire  is  so  much 
alarmed  maybe  "injured"  by  his  re-hash 
of  "history"  which  has  been  hitherto  both 
refuted  and  repudiated. 


In  another  part  of  his  Preface,  the  author 
of  "  Ireland  and  the  Pope"  assures  his 
readers  with  the  dogmatism  of  a  newly- 
fledged  Protestant  Doctor  of  Divinity,  that 
"a  man  may  reject  the  tenets  of  the  Cath- 
olic religion  and  yet  be  an  equally  good 
Iriah  patriot."  And  then  he  cites  the  names 
of  Grattan,  Emmet,  Wolfe  Tone,  Davis, 
Mitchel  and  Parnell.  Now  these  notable 
Irish  patriots  were  all  born  Protestants,  who 
never  had  the  grace  of  Catholic  faith  direct- 
ly bestowed  upon  them,  nor  tendered  to 
them  for  their  acceptance.  Hence  these 
men  never  rejected  the  tenets  of  the  Catholic 
religion.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  when  a 
Catholic  publicly  be- littles  and  belies  the 
Church  of  God  by  slurringly  styling  her  "  a 
church ;  "  when  he  slanderously  charges  the 
Pope  of  Rome  with  being  "  dangerous  only 
to  those  who  trust  in  him  ;  "  when  he  calls 
a  member  of  the  College  of  Cardinals  "  the 
red- cap-bunting-hound  of  the  Vatican,"  and 
when  he  brazenly  asserts  that  clerical  influ- 
ences have  always  kept  the  great  mass  of  the 
Irish  people  in  ignorance  of  the  facts  con- 
cerning the  history  of  their  country — every 
true  Catholic  will  rightly  doubt  the  genuine- 
ness of  such  "patriotism"  when  it  is  founded 
upon  such  apparent  apostacy. 


The  paragraph  which  concludes  the  Pref- 
ace to  this  unfortunate  book  may  be  likened 
to  a  scorpion — as  it  carries  its  sting  in  its 
tail  !  Alluding  to  the  "  political  interfer- 
ence" which  the  Pope  is  supposed  by  the 
author's  hallucination  to  be  always  "in  sea- 
son and  out  of  season''  forcing  on  the  Irish 
people,  Judge  Maguire — with  that  dignity 
which  is  so  characteristic  of  a  Catholic 
gentleman  when  writing  of  the  most 
exalted  Ecclesiastic  throughout  the  Chris- 


tian world — and  one  whom  Kings,  Queens> 
Princes  and  Presidents  delight  to  honor 
—  thus  depicts  the  attitude  of  the  successor 
of  St  Peter,  the  Vicar  of  Christ : 

"  The  Pope,  in  this  respect,  enjoys  the  un- 
enviable, not  to  say  infamou*  distinction  of  h*>it  g 
dangerous  only  to  those  who  confide  in  him." 

We  are  not  familiar  with  the  form  of  lan- 
guage used  by  the  J  udiciary  of  California, 
but  we  should  most  sincerely  hope  that 
the  foregoing  insulting  garbage  is  not  a  fair 
specimen  thereof  !  Catholics  will  feel  the 
insult  intended  and  they  will  cheerfully  ac- 
cept it  as  a  part  of  that  Cross  which  all  true 
disciples  are  bound  to  carry.  For  the  Judge 
of  the  Superior  Court  of  San  Francisco,  all 
Catholics  will  ardently  pray  :  "  Forgive  him 
Father,  for  he  knows  not  what  he  says." 
But  if  no  other  assertion  in  his  unfortunate 
book  revealed  Judge  Maguire's  malicious 
motive  in  compiling  this  literary  concoction 
of  conceit  and  calumny  combined,  the 
above  quotation  is  sufficient  to  place  his 
Honor  among  the  ranks  of  those  Pope-hating 
"patriots"  that  are  the  bosom  friends  of  fa- 
natical Frank  Pixley,  who,  very  consistently 
with  his  well-known  hatred  of  the  Catholic 
Church  and  Ireland,  pats  Judge  Maguire 
affectionately  on  the  back  in  the  last  issue 
of  his  anti-Catholic  Argonaut,  and  says  to 
his  latest  recruit :  "  Well  done  my  good 
and  faithful  servant." 


The  author  of  "  Ireland  and  the  Pope," 
opens  his  volume  with  an  imaginary  conver- 
sation between  himself  and  "  a  devout  Cath- 
olic and  brave  but  disheartened  Irish  pa- 
triot'' who  thought  the  Pope  was  "  misin- 
formed" when  he  issued  the  recent  Rescript. 
Judge  Maguire,  on  the  contrary,  is  morally 
certain  that  the  action  of  the  Holy  Father 
"had  a  political  price."  Of  course  every- 
body can  afford  to  laugh  at  his  Honor's  sug- 
gestion, in  view  of  the  recent  Letter  of  the 
Irish  Bishops  on  the  Rescript.  But  we  must 
do  Judge  Maguire  the  justice  to  say  that  he 
gives  some  reasons — and  very  queer  reasons 
they  are  -  why  he  believes  the  Pope  intended 
to  kill  the  Irish  National  League  through 
Mgr.  Persico's  agency  as  a  ''congenial  con- 
fidant and  general  spy.'1  Here  is  the  prin- 
cipal reason  : 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


15 


I.  "  Mousignor  Persico,  ia  his  letter  of 
October  last  to  the  Pope,  expressly  shows  that 
he  was  sent  to  Ireland  tn  pave  the  way  for  the 
destruction  of  the  Irish  National  League." 

As  the  legal  fraternity  would  say  :  We 
demur  to  the  decision  of  the  Court,  for  sev- 
eral reasons.  First  because  Monsignor  Per- 
sico ivrote  no  letter  to  the  Pope  last  October, 
his  Honor  s  assertion  to  the  contrary,  not- 
withstanding !  Secondly,  if — as  we  can 
prove — Monsignor  Persico  sent  no  letter  to 
the  Pope,  most  assuredly  a  document  that 
never  existed  could  hardly  be  made  to  demon- 
strate the  fact  that  Monsignor  Persico  was 
sent  anywhere  to  destroy  the  Irish  National 
League  or  anything  else  under  the  sun  ! 

No  doubt  the  author  of  the  unfortunate 
literary  venture  called  "  Ireland  and  the 
Pope"  was  misled  in  his  views  by  reading 
only  one  side  of  the  case  before  him — a  handy 
habit  in  a  pettifogger,  but  a  questionable 
practice  for  a  judge— and  so  the  English- 
concocted  cablegrams  led  him  into  this  ludi- 
crous error.  If  Judge  Maguire  had  read 
the  MONITOR  of  October  19th,  1887,  he 
would  have  been  enlightened  on  this  matter 
to  such  an  extent  that  he  would  not  have 
fallen  into  the  pit  which  the  foes  of  both 
Ireland  and  the  Pope  dug  for  him.  Here  is 
an  extract  from  the  MONITOR  of  the  above 
date  rvhich  will  enlarge  the  visual  organs 
•of  his  Honor  considerably  : 

NO  REPORT  FROM   MGR.    PERSICO. 

Untruthful  reports  concerning  Mgr.  Persico's 
opinion  of  the  state  of  Ireland  as  derived  from 
personal  observation,  having  been  maliciously 
circulated  by  the  Tory  English  press,  the  Pope's 
representative  has  found  it  necessary  to  public- 
ly contradict  the  falsehoods  thus  circulated  for 
the  sole  purpose  of  damaging  the  Irish  cause. 

On  a  recant  visit  to  Waterford,  Mgr.  Persico 
alluded  to  this  disreputable  action  on  the  part  <>f 
the  English  press  in  the  following  terms  :  "  His 
mission,"  he  said,  "  was  one  of  deference  to  the 
Bishops  and  Catholic  people  of  Ireland.  Through 
his  humble  person  the  Holy  Father  sent  his  mes- 
sage of  loving  sympathy  to  the  Irish  nation.  He 
knew  that  contradictory  statements  had  been 
made  in  certain  papers  that  he  had  sent  a  report 
of  a  certain  character  to  Rome.  He  gave  that 
statement  an  emphatic  contradiction,  but  he  felt 
that  the  Irish  people  did  not  need  any  such  con- 
tradict! in  at  his  hands.  He  came  among  them 
not  to  criticize  or  pry,  but  with  love  and  pym- 


pathy  in  his  heart,  anxious  to  see  for  himsel 
the  Hta'e  «f  the  country  and  what  it  needed  to 
male  •;  it  happy  anil  peaceful.  The  Holy  See  had 
always  evinced  the  m»«t  loving  sympathy  for 
In-land  and  had  received  in  return  th«  warmest 
devotion  of  her  ppoole.  Bvr  n<>  Pontiff  was  that 
f-elini?  more  strongly  shared  than  by  the  present 
Holy  Father." 

This  extract  most  effectively  bursts  the 
bubble  which  Judge  Mrguire  blew  up  out 
of  the  literary  suds  of  sensational  papers 
which  are  constantly  on  the  qui  vive  to  put 
the  Pop-j,  Parnell,  Mgr.  Peraico  or  other 
prominent  men  in  the  Church  or  in  Ireland 
in  precisely  the  wro^y  attitude  before  the 
eyes  of  the  whole  world  !  Justice  in  this 
instance,  at  least,  was  very  blind,  and  his 
Honor  we  hope  will  pardon  us  if  we  modest- 
ly make  the  suggestion  that  he  will  also  be 
forced  to  reverse  his  decision  in  all  that  he 
has  said  condemnatory  of  the  Pope  and 
Monsignor  Persico  ! 

The  Court  will  also  please  order  the  clerk 
to  erase  from  its  opinion  on  page  11  of  "  Ire- 
land and  the  Pope  '  all  the  incorrect  conclu- 
sions his  Honor  arrived  at  through  false  in- 
formation concerning  Mgr.  Persico  whom 
he  very  graciously  condescended  to  notice 
as  "this  treacherous  ecclesiastical  states- 
man1' who  wrote  to  the  Pope  that  "  the  Irish 
priest  would  not  abandon  the  political  strug- 
gle of  their  countrymen,  even  when  urged 
to  do  so  in  the  name  of  the  Pontiff  and  for 
the  good  of  the  Church. "  All  of  which  is 
untrue  and  naturally  falls  to  the  ground 
when  the  Court  has  discovered  that  no  let- 
ter was  sent,  and  that  the  cablegram  which 
deceived  his  Honor  was  concocted  by  some 
scheming  lover  of  sensational  lies,  who  thus 
caused  the  Superior  Court  of  San  Francisco, 
California,  to  sadly  blunder  in  its  decision  in 
the  celebrated  case  of  "The  Pope  vs.  James 
G  Maguire." 

Thus  we  have  fairly  met  and  refuted 
some  of  the  first  falsehoods  with  which 
the  author  of  "Ireland  and  the  Pope"  has 
seen  fit  to  interlard  his  ill-starred  publi- 
cation. 


1C 


THE      POPE       AND       IRBLAND. 


CHAPTER      II. 


The   Fictitious  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian  IV. — Education  in  Ireland.— The  Character  of  Giraldus 
Cambrensis  Analysed  by  Historical  Writers.  • 


The  corner-stone  of  the  inflammatory  in- 
dictment which  the  author  of  "  Ireland  ami 
the  Pope"  brings  against  the  successor  ot 
St.  Peter,  is  the  bogus  Bull  of  Pope  Adrain 
IV.,  which  Judge  Maguire  accepts  as  true, 
and  concerning  which  he  coolly  says  : 

"The  subjugation  "f  Ireland  to  English  rnl*«, 
as  is  well  known  to  all  students  of  Irish  history, 
WMS  n  >t  accomplished  by  fence  of  English  arm-, 
but  by  the  decree  and  grant  of  Pope  Adrian  IV  . 
supplemented  and  enforced  by  the  decrees  »iul 
order*  of  Pope  Alexander  III. 

"  While,  as  I  have  said,  these  facts  are  well- 
known  to  all  student*  of  Irish  history,  and  while 
they  are  fully  attested  by  every  Irish  historian 
worthy  of  name,  clerical  influences  have  alwa>« 
kept  the  great  masses  of  Irish  people  in  ignor- 
ance of  (hem,  so  that  to-day  not  one  among  a 
hiMidred  of  the  Irieh  people  know  how  their 
country  lost  her  nationality,  and  still  fewer  ate 
»  ware  of  the  persistent  efforts  of  the  successors  <-f 
Adrian  and  Alexander  to  keep  Ireland  in  the 
slavery  to  which  their  infamous  bargain  had  de- 
livered her." 

Such  is  the  dogmatic  manner  in  which 
Judge  Maguire  decides  the  criminality  of 
Popes,  defines  the  crimes  which  they  have 
committed,  and  renders  a  verdict  of  "guilty" 
in  the  harshest  language  which  his  Honor 
could  invoke  on  the  heads  of  innocent  men 
whom— without  producing  a  particle  of  evi- 
dence —he  delivers  over  to  the  execration  of 
even  Catholics,  for  the  "  infamous  bargain" 
they  entered  into  ! 

Now  it  will  be  a  most  pleasing  task  on 
«mr  part  to  point  out  the  errors  into  which 
Judge  Maguire  has  fallen  in  consequence  of 
his  Honor  having  read  only  one  side  of  this 
historical  question,  and  thus  prejudging  the 
Topes  and  prejudicing  the  Irish  people 
against  them, 

In  the  first  place  therefore,  it  is  not  tmte, 
and  consequently  it  is  not  by  any  means 
"well-known  to  all  students  of  Irish  history" 
that  Popes  Adrianand  Alexander  decreed  and 
granted  Ireland  to  Henry  II.  of  England. 
No  doubt  Judge  Maguire  would  like  every- 
body to  believe  otherwise,  but  the  weight  of 


testimony — a«  we  shall  show  further  on  —  is 
greatly  against  him. 

In  the  next  place,  Judge  Maguire's  "facts" 
(as  he  calls  his  unwarranted  assertions)  are  not 
"well  known  to  all  students  of  Irish  history," 
nor  are  they  "  fully  attested  by  every  Irish 
historian  worthy  of  the  name. "  The  charge 
against  Popes  Adrian  and  Alexander  is  at 
best  what  Father  Tom  Burke  (God  rest  his 
soul!)  would  call  t-a  Thumping  English  Lie," 
and  it  is  adopted  only  by  such  Irish  histori- 
ans as  are  only  too  willing  to  take  the  Eng- 
lish view  of  the  question,  or  too  lazy  to  give 
the  subject  that  scrutiny,  which  it  deserves 
at  their  hands.  England  has  often  hired 
moral  assassins  to  keep  Ireland  within  her 
clutches.  Unfortunately  for  the  cause  of 
Erin  England  has  found  even  Catholics  who 
were  willing  to  be  bribed  into  writing  so- 
called  "histories''  which  — like  Scott's  "Life 
of  Napoleon,"  were  written  to  order  by  the 
British  Government  in  order  to  convince  the 
world  that  England  was  right  in  every  in- 
iquity she  perpetrated  against  those  whom 
she  overthrew. 

The  very  first  man  whom  England 
hired  to  give  currency  to  the  falsehood 
that  Popes  Adrian  and  Alexander  gave  Ire- 
land to  England,  was  a  Welsh  priest  named 
Gerald  Barry,  who  is  known  under  the  nom 
de  plume  of  "  Cambrensis,"  and  who  evinced 
his  idolatry  for  the  monarch  to  whom  he  had 
hired  himself,  by  styling  Henry  II.,  "  the 
Alexander  of  the  West,"  "  the  Invincible," 
"  the  Solomon  of  the  age,"  "  the  most  pious 
of  Princes,"  when — as  we  shall  show  further 
on,  it  is  well  known  that  Henry  was  not 
only  a  most  immoral  man,  but  he  also  caused 
the  saintly  Bishop  Thomas  a'Becket  to  be 
murdered  in  his  own  Cathedral ! 

It  is  really  singular  what  unanimity 
exists  between  all  enemies  of  the  Church 
and  the  Popes  concerning  their  fears  re- 
garding a  mythical  something  which  they  all 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


designate  by  the  attractive  title,  of  "  clerical 
influence."  Luther  lampooned  it,  Benry 
VIII.,  hurled  defiance  at  it,  Dr.  McGlyrm 
censured  it,  Her.ry  George  decried  it,  and 
now  conies  the  Censurer-General  of  the  Vice- 
gerent of  Christ  -  the  disgruntled  author  of 
''Ireland  and  the  Pope"— who  declaims 
most  violently  against  that  ethereal  hob- 
L'oblin  conveniently  called  by  critics  of  the 
Popes  "clerical  influence."  The  Judge  of 
our  Superior  Court  unqualifiedly  asserts  that 
the  Irish  people  are  so  disgracefully  ignor- 
ant that  not  one  in  a  hundred  of  them  knows 
anything  of  the  "infamous  bargain"  of 
Popes  Adrian  and  Alexander  and  their  suc- 
cessors! This  is  a  serious  charge,  but,  for- 
tunately, ic  is  one  of  Henry  George's  flimsy 
fictions  which  his  San  Francisco  disciple  has 
copied  from  him.  The  Irish  people  are 
neither  the  ignorant  dupes  Judge  Maguire 
depicts  them,  nor  are  they  foolish  enough  to 
accept  the  frantic  fanaticism  of  a  frothy 
fireband  for  the  truth  of  history.  Centuries 
before  the  Superior  Court  of  San  Francisco 
had  a  Chief  Censurer-General  of  the  Popes 
within  its  bailiwick,  the  Irish  people  knew  far 
better  than  Judge  Maguire  can  now  tell 
them,  the  whole  history  of  their  land  as  it 
was  handed  down  through  tradition  from 
parent  to  child.  And  the  descendants  of 
this  grand  old  Irish  stock,  who  live  in  the 
present  day,  have  no  occasion  to  sit  at  the 
feet  of  any  Georgeite  Gamaliel  in  order  to 
learn  the  history  of  the  land  of  their  birth. 
Where  and  from  whom  did  did  this  ghost 
of  "  clerical  influence"  assume  a  shape  and 
became  materialized '',  Assuredly  not  in 
Rome  nor  from  the  Popes,  as  not  one  of  them 
ever  exercised  the  slightest  restraining  influ- 
ence over  the  education  of  the  Irish  people. 
Was  it  from  the  Irish  Bishops  1  Decidedly 
not  !  No  body  of  Prelates  in  the  Universal 
Church  of  Christ  ever  did  more  to  foster  and 
to  propagate  among  their  people  a  knowl- 
edge of  the  history  of  their  native  land,  than 
did  the  Bishops  of  Ireland.  In  the  face  of 
the  fiercest  Penal  Code  that  ever  disgraced 
the  statute  books  of  any  country,  the  Irish 
Bishops  had  the  history  of  Ireland  taught 
to  Catholic  children  in  the  shadows  of  the 
sweet  hawthorne  hedges  of  Ireland,  because 
it  was  imprisonment  and  exile  toboih  teach- 
er and  pupil  if  British  spies  discovered  a 


Catholic  school  in  Erin  !  It  was  the  Irish 
Bishops  who  sent  their  ecclesiastical  stu- 
dents to  Rome,  Louvain,  Paris  and  other 
cities  in  Continental  Europe,  to  be  thorough- 
ly educated  in  Irish  literature  and  theology, 
so  that  they  could  lead  their  flocks  both 
along  the  narrow  path  of  true  Faith,  and  also 
through  the  lines  of  legitimate  agitation  by 
which  they  could — and  will  eventually — 
secure  the  liberty  of  their  native  land. 

Comparatively  speaking  it  is  only  a  few 
years  since  Catholic  Emancipation  was 
granted  and  the  legal  shackles  of  coercion  of 
conscience  unloosed  from  Priest  and  patriot 
in  Ireland.  Yet  what  a  grand  galaxy  of 
scholars,  historiar  s,  orators,  statesmen,  poets 
and  theologians  the  Catholic  body  in  Ireland 
has  produced  since  then  !  The  mythical 
"  clerical  influence"  of  Judge  Maguire  did 
not  certainly  use  what  his  Honor  would  call 
its  "  infamous  bargain"  in  repressing  the 
poetical,  musical,  oratorical  or  historical 
genius  of  Ireland  !  No  country  in  the  world 
has  more  of  its  history  embodied  in  its  music 
and  poetry  than  Ireland,  and  even  the  boys 
and  girls  of  Ireland,  as  they  whistle  and  lilt 
the  martial  air  and  words  of  "  Let  Erin  Re- 
member the  Days  of  Old,"  could  give  Judge 
Maguire  a  lesson  in  Irish  history  which 
would  actually  alarm  the  Judge  of  the  Su- 
perior Court  of  San  Francisco  at  his  own 
"ignorance"  and  at  the  surprising  knowl- 
edge possessed  by  even  the  yossuuns  and  col- 
leens of  old  Grunuaile  ! 

To  her  glory  be  it  said,  the  great  majority 
of  Ireland  a  best  and  brightest  men  were 
educated  under  the  >Egis  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  beneath  the  very  canopy  of  that 
"  clerical  influence"  which  Judge  Maguire 
so  mistakingly  and  yet  so  maliciously  desig- 
nates as  exercising  its  prerogative  to  keep  the 
people  of  Ireland  in  ignorance  of  the  history 
of  a  land  whose  political  persecution  came 
through  the  prescriptive  legislation  leveled 
at  the  Church  herself  !  To  keep  the  Irish 
people  in  ignorance  of  the  history  of  their 
country,  therefore,  would  be  to  eradicate 
from  their  minds  the  history  of  the  martyrs 
who  died  for  the  Catholic  faith,  the 
Confessors  who  proclaimed  it,  and  the  per- 
secuted people  who  suffered  for  it !  Even 
as  recent  an  enemy  of  the  Pope  as  the  Judge 
of  the  Superior  Court  of  San  Francisco,  will 


18 


THE      POPE      AND      IREL.VHD. 


be  forced  to  admit  that  no  "clerical  influ- 
ence'' whatever,  in  the  Catholic  Church, 
would  so  stupidly  stultify  itself  as  to  com- 
mit such  a  suicidal  blunder  as  that  ! 

The  truth  is  that  the  history  of  Ireland 
has  been  told  by  Catholic  Bishops  and  Priests 
to  their  people  from  the  pulpits  of  Irish 
•churches,  in  lectures  and  sermons,  from  time 
immemorial,  especially  during  the  long  night 
of  English  bondage,  when,  in  the  eyes  of  the 
•enemies  of  suffering  Erin, 

'•  It  WHS  treacon  to  love  her 
And  death  to  defend." 

On  the  rostrum  and  from  the  altar-steps, 
•on  the  verdant  hillsides  and  by  the  banks  of 
the  Shannon,  the  Suir,  the  Biackwater,  the 
Liffey  and  the  Lee;  in  the  cabin  of  the  peas- 
ant and  beside  the  sweet-smelling  turf  fire 
of  the  Sogyarth  Aroon,  the  sad  history  of 
Ireland's  sufferings  has  been  reiterated  time 
and  again,  until  even  the  women  and  chil- 
dren of  that  country  treasured  every  fact  of 
it  in  their  ever-faithful  hearts  ! 

And  in  later  years,  when  the  sunlight  of 
freedom  of  conscience,  of  speech,  and  of  the 
press,  was  permitted  to  permeate  the  penal- 
law  laden  atmosphere  of  Ireland,  how  glad- 
ly the  Bishops  of  that  partially  emancipated 
land  availed  themselves  of  the  valuable  ser- 
vices of  the  Teaching  Orders  of  the  Church 
in  order  to  dispel  that  very  murky  "ignor- 
ance" which  Judge  Murphy  asserts  was  fos- 
tered by  '.clerical  influence."  The  Broth- 
ers of  the  Christian  Schools,  the  Brothers 
of  St.  Patrick,  the  Brothers  of  St.  Francis, 
and  even  the  priests  themselves,  founded 
Catholic  schools  wherein  the  very  atmos- 
phere was  impregnated  with  Irish  patriotism 
gleaned  from  a  knowledge  of  Irish  history. 
And  what  the  Fathers  and  Brothers  did  for 
the  boys  of  Ireland,  the  Jesuits,  the  Vin- 
centians,  the  Marists,  the  Dominicans  and 
the  secular  clergy  did  for  the  young  men  of 
Ireland  in  the  Colleges  which  the  "clerical 
influence"  of  Catholic  Bishops  established  in 
nearly  every  Diocese  in  that  Island  of  Saints 
and  Sages  ! 

And  what  shall  we  say  of  the  "ignorance" 
of  Irish  history  in  which  the  female  youth 
of  Ireland  has  been  kept  for  the  past  half 
century  by  those  pure  and  patriotic  Sisters 
who  form  the  Female  Religious  Orders  who 
.have  implanted  virtue  and  holiness  as  well 


as  historical  knowledge  in  the  immaculate 
breasts  of  the  daughters  of  St.  Patrick  ? 
What  a  sentiment  of  disgust  must  flash  over 
the  faces  of  the  Presentation  Sisters,  Sis- 
ters of  Mercy,  Ursulines,  Sisters  of  Charity 
Poor  Clares,  Sisters  of  Loretto,  and  other 
zealous  teachers  of  Ireland's  youth,  when 
they  learn  from  the  Judge  of  the  Superior 
Court  of  San  Francisco  that  they  are  co- 
conspirators  with  certain  undefined  "  cleri- 
cal influences"  to  keep  the  rising  generation 
of  Irish  girls  in  deep  "ignorance"  of  the 
true  history  of  their  country  !  Shame  upon 
the  writer  who  would  bring  such  a  wanton 
charge  against  the  Church  which  gave  him 
the  Christianity  and  the  education  he  thus 
defiles  ! 

The  facts  we  have  cited,  therefore,  will 
impel  every  Irish  Catholic  and  every  Irish- 
American  Catholic  within  the  jurisdiction 
not  only  of  the  Superior  Court  of  San  Fran- 
C'sco,  but  also  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  to  de- 
nounce in  unmeasured  terms  the  false  and 
foul  assertion  of  Judge  Maguire,  as  a  piece 
of  dastardly  defamation  which  would  dis- 
grace the  already  dishonored  mind  of  even 
the  fraudulent  Froude  himself !  In  fact 
such  an  assertion  could  only  emanate  from 
a  mind  surcharged  with  hatred  against  the 
Popes,  the  Prelates,  the  Priests  and  the  peo- 
ple of  Ireland  who  belong  to  God's  Church, 
a  Church  which  entails  upon  itself  the  wrath 
of  its  enemies  because  she  excommunicates 
insubordinate  ecclesiastics,  and  which  says  to 
political  demagogues  who  would  seek  to  se- 
cure temporal  rights  at  the  sacrifice  of  Faith 
and  Christian  ethics  : — "  Thus  far  shalt  thou 
go  and  no  farther." 


Recklessness  of  expression  is  characteris- 
tic of  all  would-be  Church  critics,  especially 
when  they  happen  to  be  Catholics  who  have 
fallen  away  from  the  faith  of  their  fathers. 
In  their  over  reaching  ambition  to  drag 
down  other  Catholic  men  to  the  deep  pit 
into  which  they  themselves  have  fallen 

"Unwept,  uohonored  and  unsung," 

these  unfortunate  soul-suicides  make  the  most 
reckless  and  ridiculous  charges  against  the 
Church  to  which  they  have  proved  renegades, 
and  the  Faith  they  have  foolishly  flung  back 


THE      POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


19 


into  the  Holy  Face  of  that  God  from  Whose 
Charity  they  received  il.  These  unwise 
worldlings  act  thus  so  that  they  may  present 
themselves  to  the  world  they  worship  as  men 
animated  by  the  highest  motives  and  the 
purest  "patriotism."  But  vain  are  their 
caustic  criticisms,  idle  are  their  vapory  in- 
sinuations, whilst  their  covert  calumnies 
only  recoil  upon  their  heretical  heads,  to  the 
greater  increase  of  their  deep  yet  well-de- 
served degradation. 

No  amount  of  pretended  "  patriotism" 
can  conceal  from  the  penetrating  gaze  of 
Irish  Catholic  people  the  leprous  ulcers  on 
the  sin-laden  souls  of  apostate  priests  or 
turn  coat  politicians.  With  the  Irish  Cath- 
olic, whether  in  Australia  or  America,  on  the 
Continent  of  Europe,  or  in  the  jungles  of 
India, 

F*ith  and  Fatherland 
Go  hand  in  hand. 

They  know  full  well  that  the  pretended 
'*  patriot''  who  is  a  Judas  to  his  God,  will 
eventually  prove  an  Arnold  to  the  Irish 
cause.  They  realize  the  fact  fr^m  bitter  ex- 
perience that  a  staunch  Protestant  like  Par- 
nell  is  a  far  safer  political  guide  than  a  Cath- 
olic who  has  made  himself  believe  that  his 
soul  is  not  large  enough  to  contain  both  his 
religion  and  his  Home  Rule  principles. 
Hencs,  those  foolish  writers  who  mistakingly 
think  they  elevate  themselves  by  puffing  up 
their  pretended  "patriotism,"  by  lampoon- 
ing and  lying  against  the  Popes,  and  by 
concocting  windy  and  watery  diatribes 
against  "  clerical  influences" — which  are 
merely  meaningless,  mental  cobwebs  of  their 
own  diseased  imaginations — soon  find  their 
level  when  their  tricks  are  exposed  and  their 
cant,  hypocrisy  and  degraded  demagoguism 
is  pilloried  in  the  public  press  in  all  its 
naked  deformity ! 


In  his  eager  desire  to  prove  that  the  Bull 
of  Pope  A  drian  was  a  genuine  document, 
Judge  Maguire  vauntingly  proclaims  the 
fact  that — with  two  exceptions  -  all  the  Irish 
historians  from  Geraldus  Cambrensis  in  1178, 
bear  witness  in  favor  of  his  side  of  the  case. 
Now  let  us  examine  into  the  moral,  intel- 
lectual and  linguistic  acquirements  of  Gerald 
Barry — who  is  the  Geraldus  Cambrensis  of 
Judge  Maguire — in  order  to  present  to  "the 


Court"  the  character  of  the  witness  whom 
his  Honor  .introduces  as  best  qualified  to 
give  testimony  against  Popes  Adrian  and 
Alexander. 

Here  is  the  faithful  pen-portrait  which  the 
Abbe  MacGeoghegan  draws  of  this  hireling 
Welshman  whom  Judge  Maguire  very  singu - 
larly  selects  as  foremost  among  Irish  his- 
torians !  Here  is  the  character  of  Judge 
Maguire's  principal  witness  in  the  hopeless 
task  his  Honor  has  undertaken  of  proving 
his  charges  against  certain  Popes  of  Rome. 

In  the  opening  chapter  of  his  elaborate 
History  of  Ireland,  the  Abbe  MacGeoghegan 
thus  dissects  the  "history"  which  Geraldus 
Cambrensis  concocted  by  order  of  the  King 
of  England  who  was  determined  to  make 
falsehood  appear  as  truth,  and  to  foster 
forgery  through  fraud --in  order  to  adduce 
even  suborned  evidence  in  proof  of  his  pre- 
tended right  t )  retain  Ireland  in  the  grasp 
of  England. 

"The  English,  having  in  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury, put  an  end  to  the  Irish  monarchy, 
and  wishing  to  give  a  color  of  justice  to 
their  usurpation,  and  to  the  tyranny 
which  they  exercised  against  the  inhabi- 
tants of  the  country,  have,  without  any 
other  title  than  a  fictitious  bull,  of  Adrian 
the  Fourth,  and  the  right  of  the  strongest, 
represented  the  Irish  as  savages,  who  in- 
habited the  woods,*  and  who  never  obeyed 
the  laws,  as  if  these  titles  were  sufficient 
for  stripping  them  of  their  properties.f 
What!  that  people  so  renowned  in  the 
first  ages  of  Christianity  for  their  piety 
and  learning,  and  among  whom  the  Anglo- 
Saxons  themselves  went,  according  to  their 
own  historians,  to  be  instructed,  during 
the  centuries,  which  preceded  the  invasion 
of  the  English,  are  all  of  a  sudden  reduced 
to  the  condition  of  savageslj  The  meta- 
morphosis is  too  difficult  to  be  admitted, 
and  at  the  same  time  too  obvious  for  us  not 
to  feel  how  absurd  such  an  accusation 
must  be.  * 

Gerald  Barry,  a  priest,  and  native  of  *v 
country  of  Wales,  k 
Latin  Cambria,  (from 
the  name  of  Cambrem 
is  known).,    was  the   fi 
undertook  to  write  the  i 


*Sylvestres  Hiberni. 
tCamd.  edit.  Lond.  p.  73f 

}  "They  retired  hither,  f 
of  divine  study,  or  a  mcA 
Bede's  Church  History,  b.C 


20 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


n  order   to   perpetuate  the 
which  his  countrymen  had  already  pub- 
lished against  its  inhibit 'intx. 

Circumstances  required  that  they  should 
m  ike  th«  Irish  pass  for  barbarians.  The 
title  of  Henry  the  Second  was  founded  only 
upon  a  bull  obtained  clandestinely  from 
Pope  Adrian  the  Fourth,  an  Englishman 
by  bir'.h.  The  cause  of  this  bull  was  a 
false  statement  which  Henry  had  given  to 
the  Pope  of  the  impiety  and  barbarism  of 
the  Irish  nation.  CambrensU  Was  then 
ordered  to  verify,  by  writing,  the  state- 
ment upon  which  the  granting  of  the  bull 
had  been  extorted.  He  did  not  fail  to 
intermix  his  work  witU  calumnies,  and 
groundless  absurdities;  however,  the  credit 
of  a  powerful  kingknew  how  to  make  even 
the  court  of  Rome  believe  them.  It  was 
in  this  spirit  that  Cambrensis  wrote  his 
history^  and  from  thence  the  English 
authors  have  taken  the  false  coloring 
under ^  which  ancient  Ireland  has  been 
represented.  Passion  and  interest  made 
them  pass  over  the  recantation  which 
Cambrensis  felt  himself  obliged  to  make, 
in  the  latter  part  of  his  life,  of  several  false 
and  calumnious  imputations,  with  which 
'his  history  has  been  filled.  Cambrensis 
did  not  possess  the  necessary  requisites  for 
an  historian.  History  is  not  a  mere  pro- 
duction of  the  mind;  it  is  an  assemblage  of 
facts,  the  arrangement  of  which  depends 
alone  upon  the  author.  To  write  the 
history  of  a  country  it  is  essential  to  know 
it,  likewise  the  character  and  genius  of  ita 
inhabitants,  and  to  be  capable  of  consult- 
ing its  annals.  Cambrensis  possessed  none 
of  these  qualities  with  respect  to  Ireland, 
the  history  whereof  he  undertook  to  write. 
It  is  true,  that  he  had  been  twice  in  that 
country,  first  through  curiosity,  in  1171, 
to  witness  the  advancement  of  his  relations 
and  friends;  secondly,  as  preceptor  of  John 
Earl  of  Montayne,  son  of  Henry  the  Second 
to  whom,  the  king,  his  father,  had  given 
the  title  Lord  of  Ireland.  In  those  two 
voyages  he  remained  but  eighteen  months 
in  Ireland,  and  saw  about  one-third  of  it, 
which  alone  obeyed  the  English;  he  could 
not  with  safety  put  his  foot  into  any  other 
'"«»rt  of  the  kingdom.  Being  incapable  of 
-  *'  rds  of  the  country, 

guage  to  which  he    was 
jger,)  he  tt\«s  obliged  to 
id  of  truth!  falsehoods, 
,ons  of  a  pr<  jikliccd  mind, 
umes. 

animals,  which  wallow  in 
i'er  it  to  the  sweetest  flowers* 

defiled  his  writings   with    the 

•  rabble;   he  resolved  to  stuff 

>n  with  the  iiii perfections  of 

orded   by   himself,  like  the 

.aws  poison  from  the  thyme 


he  attached  himself  to  whatever  he  coulJ 
discover  meanest  and  most  vil«i  among  the 
people;  unsupported  likewise  by  any 
written  authority,  or  the  evidence  of  any 
correct  or  impartial  man,  he  composed  an 
absurd  collection  of  old  women's,  sailors' 
and  soldiers' stories,  which  he  seasons  with 
scandalous  aspersions,  satires  and  invec- 
tives against  tne  nation;  neither  prince 
nor  people,-  clergy,  secular  or  regular,  are 
spared;  he  respects  nothing;  everything 
becomes  the  object  of  his  calumnies  and 
detraction^  Having  spent  five  years  in 
composing  this  fine  work,  the  five  books 
of  his  pretended  history  of  Ireland  came 
forth.  In  raptures  with  that  new  produc- 
tion of  his  genius,  and  unable  to  conceal 
his  vanity,  Cambrensis  repaired  to  Oxford}: 
where,  in  presence  of  learned  doctors  and 
the  assembled  people,  he  read,  after  the 
example  of  the  Greeks,  his  topography, 
during  three  successive  days,  giving  to  each 
successive  book  an  entire  day.  To  render 
the  comedy  more  solemn,  he  treated  the 
whole  town  splendidly  for  three  days;  the 
first  was  appropriated  to  the  populace;  the 
second  to  the  doctors,  professors  and  prin- 
cipal scholars  of  the  university;  and  lastly 
the  third  day  he  regaled  the  otner  scholars 
soldiers  and  citizens  of  the  town;  "a  noble 
and  brilliant  action,"  Bays  Cambrensis 
himself,  "whereby  the  ancient  custom  of 
the  poets  has  been,  for  the  first  time,  re- 
newed in  England."  But  unfortunately 
for  him,  the  success  did  not  answer  his 
expectations;  it  was  easily  seen,  particu- 
larly at  court,  that  the  bad  choice  he  had 
made  of  the  materials  whereof  his  history 
had  been  composed,  and  the  fables  he  had 
introduced  into  it,  could  be  but  the  effect 
of  his  ignorance,  or  hatred  for  the  Irish 
nation.  They  were  not  astray  for  the 
cause  of  that  hatred;  besides  the  private 
quarrel  which  he  bad  with  Aubin  O'Mol- 
loy,  monk  of  the  order  of  Citeaux,  and 
abbot  nf  Bahinglass,  in  which  he  was 
defeated,  and  wbich  excited  his  anger 
against  that  nation,  he  wished  for  the  ruin 
and  destruction  altogether  of  the  Irish, 
who  might  prove  an  obstacle  to  the  ag- 
grandizement of  his  relatives  and  friends, 

t  Grat.  Lucius,  r.ap.  5,  p.  38. 
}  Usser.  Silog.  edit.  Par.  Epist,  49,  p.  84, 
et,  85. 

from  which  the  bee  extracts  honey.  He  has 
thus  formed  from  among  the  most  abandoned 
of  the  Irish,  a  package;  leaving  those  things 
which  he  found  most  eminent,  unnoticed. 
Whatsoever  filth  he  discovered,  appeared  as 
a  gem  to  him;  with  it,  as  if  most  precious, 
has  he  arranged  his  productions  and  work, 
so  that,  like  the  swine,  he  delights  more  in 
the  dunghill  than  to  enjoy  himself  amidst 
the  sweetest  odors." — Gratianus  Lucius,  p.  5, 
c.  41. 


THE       POPE       AND       1RKLAND. 


21 


as  appear*  from  his  second  book  on  the 
conquest  <.f  that  people.  Nothing  tends  to 
discover*  more  easily  the  malignity  and 
inconsistency  of  Cambrensis'  mind,  than 
the  extremes  into  which  he  lets  himself  be 
carried.  Sometimes  he  extols  with  warmth 
the  merit  of  his  relations,  newly  wtuWi^hed 
in  that  country;  again  he  exclaim*  vio- 
lently against  the  English  and  Normans 
engagMl  with  them  in  the  same  cause, 
against  the  Irish. 

While  King  Henry  II.  lived,  that  prince 
was,  according  to  him,  "the  Alexander  of 
the  west,"  "the  Invincible,"  "the  Solo- 
mon of  his  age,"  ''the  most  pious  of  prin- 
ces,"  who  had  the  glory  of  repressing  the 
fury  of  the  Gentiles,  not  only  of  Europe, 
but  likewise  of  Asia,  beyond  the  Mediter- 
ranean. The  most  extravagant  phrases 
which  the  refined  flatterer  could  invent 
were  not  spared  in  extolling  him,  contrary 
to  reason  and  common  sense;  for  exam- 
ple, he  did  not  blush  to  say  of  that  prince, 
that  his  victories  and  conquests  were  lim- 
ited only  by  the  circumference  and  ex- 
tremities of  the  earth.  However,  so  soon 
as  the  .king  was  dead,  (as  David  Powell 
remarks,)  he  broke  forth  into  a  thousand 
invectives  against  his  memory  in  the  book 
entitled  "The  Instructions  of  a  Prince," 
and  gave  free  vent  to  his  ancient  enmity 
against  him.  That  alone  should  suffice  to 
characterize  this  author,  and  to  show  what 
littie  credit  every  thing  else  which  he  ad- 
vanced is  entitled. 

The  reproaches  which  were  directed 
against  Cambrensis /or  having  inserted  in 
his  writings  so  much  fabulous  matter  ob- 
liged him  to  recant  what  he  had  advanced 
both  by  an  apology,  inserted  in  the  preface 
of  his  book,  called,  "The  Conquest  of  Ire- 
land," and  a  treatise  on  "Recantation." 
In  these  he  acknowledges  that,  although 
he  learned  from  men  of  that  country, 
worthy  of  belief,  mftny  things  which  he 
mentions,  he  had  followed  the  reports  of 
the  vulgar  in  many  others;  but  he  thinks 
as  St.  Augustine,  in  hi*  book  on  the  "City 
of  God,"  that  we  should  not  positively  aff- 
irm, nor  absolutely  deny,  the  things  we 
have  only  from  hereby.  Sir  James  Ware 
in  his  "Antiquities  of  Ireland,"  knew  how 
to  appreciate  with  justice  the  merit  of  our 

*  Grat.  Luc.  c.  7,  p.  49,  50,  51.  52,  53  etc. 

*  "Many  things  concerning  Ireland  could 
be   noticed  in  this  place    as  fabulous,  which 
Cambrensis   hath  heaped  together   in  his  to- 
pography.    To  analyze  or  descant  upon  each 
would  require  a  whole  tract.     Caution  should 
be   particularly  applied  by  the  reader   to  his 
topography,  which  Giraldns  himself  confess- 
es.    I  cannot  but  express  my  surprise,  how 
men  now-a-days  otherwise  grave  and  learned 
have  obtruded  on  the   world  the   fictions   of 
Giraldus  for  truths." — Ware's  Antiquities  of 
Ireland,  c.  23, 


author.  The  following  is  the  opinion  he 
holds  of  him:  "C.imbrensis,"  said  he 
"has  collected  into  his  topography  .so  many 
fabulous  things,  that  it  would  r<  quire  an 
entire  volume  to  diccuss  it  correctly."  Ih 
the  mean  time  he  warns  the  reader  to  per- 
use it  with  caution;  he  then  adds,  ''That 
it  astonishes  him  how  men  of  his  time, 
otherwise  grave  and  learned,  could  have 
imposed  upon  the  world,  by  giving  as 
truths  the  fictitious  of  Cambrensis" 

But.  notwithstanding  the  incontestable 
proofs  of  tlie  fallacy  and  imposture  in  the 
writings  of  this  discredited  author,  and  al- 
though they  had  lain  400  years  in  obscurity 
until  1602,  when  Camden  had  them  pub- 
lished at  Frankfort,  all.  who  have  spoken 
of  the  Irish  since  that  period,  but  partic- 
ularly the  English,  have  no  other  foun- 
dation for  the.ir  abuses  against  them 
than  the  authority  of  that  impostor. 
The  evil  has  become  so  general  throughout 
Europe,  that  in  most  books  and  geograph- 
ical treatises,  wherein  there  is  mention  of 
the  manners  and  customs  of  nations,  we 
find  upon  the  Irish  only  the  poisoned  darts 
which  Cambrensis  had  directed  against 
them.f 

After  the  character  now  drawn  of  Cam- 
brensis, let  the  judicious  and  impartial 
reader  judge  if  he  can  be  considered  as  a 
grave  historian,  and  one  worthy  of  credit; 
or  if  he  should  not,  on  the  contrary,  oe 
looked  upon  as  a  libeller  and  impostor, 
who  sought,  by  amusing  the  public  with 
absurd  tales,  to  disgrace,  against  all  truth 
and  justice,  an  entire  nation.  All  others 
among  the  English  who  have  undertaken 
to  write  the  history  of  Ireland,  particularly 
since  the  Reformation,  have,  "like  the  asp 
that  borrows  the  venom  of  the  viper,"t 
taken  the  same  tone  as  Cambrensis,  and 
faithfully  followed  his  tracks;  among  the 
number  are  Hammer,  Campion,  Spencer, 
Camden  &c.  By  breathing  the  same  air 
as  he,  they  were  animated  by  the  same 
spirit,  and  have  inherited  all  his  hatred 
against  the  Irish. 


What  must  intelligent  and  impartial  peo- 
ple think  of  Judge  Maguire's  principal  wit- 
ness against  the  Pope  and  in  favor  of  the 
bogus  Bull  ?  A  hireling  writer  is  like  a 
perjured  witness,  and  Gerald  Barry,  as  the 
Abbe  MacGeoghegan  clearly  shows,  was  the 
purchased  tool  of  one  of  England's  tyranni- 
cal monarchs  who  hired  the  Welshman  to 
malign  the  people  of  Ireland,  and  to  fabri- 

t  Grat.  Luc.  c.  1,  p.  4. 

t  "They  are  borne  by  a  similar  propensity 
to  traduce  the  Irish,  (as  it  is  expressed  in  the 
proverb)  the  asp  borrows  poison  from  the  vi- 
per."— Gratianus  Lucius,  c.  1,  p.  3. 


22 


THK       POPB       AND       IEELAND. 


cate  reasons  why  a  fraudulent,  forged  and 
fictitious  Bull  should  be  considered  genuine  ! 

A  nice  witness  that  to  support  the  ani- 
mosity which  Judge  Magu ire's  antagonism 
to  the  Pope's  clearly  demonstrates  !  A  bad 
cause  is  consistently  backed  up  by  bad  men 
and  bad  books,  and  in  selecting  the  malig- 
nant, mercenary  Cambrensis  as  the  corner- 
stone of  his  testimony  against  Pope  Adrian, 
Judge  Maguire  has  virtually  broken  down 
his  own  case,  and  every  candid  person  will 
say  with  the  MONITOR  that  it  should  be 
thrown  out  of  Court ! 

It  will  be  noticed  in  the  above  extract 
that  the  Abbe  Mac  Geoghegan  says  "  the 
title  of  Henry  II.  to  Ireland  was  founded 
only  upon  a  Bull  obtained  clandestinely  from 
Pope  Adrian  IV.  The  cause  of  this  Bull 
was  a  false  statement  which  Henry  had  given 


to  the  Pope  of  the  impiety  and  barbarism  of 
the  Irish  nation."  This  at  first  sight  might  ap- 
pear as  if  such  were  the  sentiment  of  the 
writer,  but  as  the  Abbe  MacGeoghegan  had 
perviously  made  use  of  the  condemnatory 
expression  "  a  fictitious  Bull  of  Adrian  the 
Fourth,"  it  is  easily  seen  that  the  writer  was 
merely  stating  the  case  us  set  forth  by  the 
enemies  of  the  Church,  who  were  always  de- 
sirous of  discovering  some  pretext  by  which 
to  break  the  chains  of  faith  and  love  which 
have  ever  bound  the  hearts  of  the  people  of 
Ireland  to  the  Pope  of  Rome. 

So  much  for  the  wretch  Gerald  Barry, 
whom  Abbe"  MacGeoghegan  justly  styles  "  a 
libeller  and  an  impostor,"  and  whom  Judge 
Maguire  places  most  prominently  in  the  wit- 
ness-box in  order  to  give  perjured  testimony 
against  the  Popes  of  Rome  ! 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


23. 


CHAPTER     III. 

The  Character  of  Giraldns  Cambrensis  Depicted  by  Different  Writers. 


THIRD  ARTICLE. 

The  fraudulent  motiyes  which  prompted 
the  hireling  Giraldua  Cambrensis  to  accede 
to  the  request  of  King  Henry  II.  of  Eng- 
land, which  the  Abbe  McGeoghegan  so 
lucidly  exposes,  have  also  drawn  down 
upon  the  head  of  that  disreputable  Welsh- 
man the  just  indignation  of  numerous  other 
Irish  historical  writers. 

Assuredly  Judge  Maguire  could  not  have 
known  the  true  character  of  Giraldus  Cam- 
brensis, or  he  would  never  have  cited  that 
pensioned  libeler  of  the  Irish  people  as  a 
witness  to  the  authenticity  of  the  bogus 
Bull  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.  Already  we  have 
shown  the  diabolical  mendacity  of  Judge 
Maguire's  principal  witness  against  the 
Popes,  upon  the  evidence  of  such  veritable 
testimony  as  that  given  by  the  Abbe  Mac- 
Geoghegan,  and  now  let  us  place  on  the 
witness  stand  of  the  Superior  Court  of  San 
Francisco  other  trustworthy  witnesses  whose 
evidence  will  not  only  fully  corroborate 
the  truth  told  by  Abbe  MacGeoghegan,  but 
some  of  whom  go  even  to  further  extremes 
in  their  just  condemnation  of  the  bribe- 
taking  calumniator  of  both  the  Pope  and 
the  Irish  people,  the  stool-pigeon  of  Henry 
the  Second  —Giraldus  Cambrensis. 

Speaking  of  the  inhuman  brood  of  blood- 
thirsty Welshmen  whom  the  iniquitous 
Irish  traitor  MacMurrough  gathered  around 
him  in  Wales,  when  he  applied  to  King 
Henry  II.  of  England  for  help  to  avert  the 
threatened  vengeance  of  the  Irish  people, 
Professor  Martin  A.  O'Brennan,  in  the  first 
volume  of  his  Irish  Antiquities,  draws  the 
following  brief  but  graphic  picture  of  the 
peculiarities  which  adorned  their  characters: 

"  Almost  every  history  on  Irish  matters, 
even  Wright's,  (brought  out  by  Tallis),  has 
agreed  that  the  cause  of  religion  in  Ireland, 
at  that,  very  time,  [the  time  of  Henry's  in- 
vasion] did  not  require  any  reformation — 
and  could  not  expect  it  from  the  allies  of 
the  adulterous,  perjured  Mac  Murrough. 
Who  were  his  first  adherents  in  Wales  ? 
The  Fifcz  Henrys,  illegitimate  sons  of  Henry 
I.,  and  other  children  of  Nesta,  the  concu- 
bine of  the  said  Henry,  viz.  De  Gros,  Fitz- 


GeraM,  Fitz  Stephen,  the  three  De  Harris, 
one  of  whom  was  the  infamous  Cambrensis- 
— all  the  offspring  of  the  harlot  Nesta — a 
vicious  monarch,  with  Cavanagh,  his  bas- 
tard son,  were  the  nest  of  robbers  who,  at 
first,  gave  their  adhesion  to  Derinod.  iiod! 
how  awful  is  the  reflection,  that  an  island 
which  was  so  powerful  iti  resources  should 
become  the  prey  of  such  an  infernal  ban- 
ditti -  all  the  issue  of  sin  !  The  soul  shrink* 
back  from  the  contemplation  of,  and  the 
flesh  of  the  hand  that  writes  these  lines, 
creeps  with  disgust  at  the  mere  recording  of 
such  turpitude.  From  the  origin  of  the 
gang  of  English  plunderers  we  refer  to 
Wright's  '•  Ireland,'  chap.  ix.  p.  1.  The 
idea  of  Satan  quoting  Scripture  is  not  more 
repugnant  than  religious  reform  from  such 
sinful  reptiles.  What  a  precious  company 
Dermod  brought  with  him  to  the  Abbot  of 
Ferns,  in  Wexford.  Cambrensis  says  that 
the  Helen  of  Ireland,  Dervorgilla,  wife  of 
O'Rourke,  was  one  of  the  company  at  the 
Abbot's  table.  Can  it  be?  We  cannot 
answer.  What  a  fraternity  !  Only  the 
presence  of  the  murderer  of  the  glorious 
a  Becket  was  wanted  to  complement  one  of 
the  most  remarkable  brotherhoods  that  ever 
existed  !" 

What  do  Catholics  think  of  the  origin  of 
Giraldus  Cambrensis,  the  first  and  foremost 
witness  whom  the  author  of  "Ireland  and 
the  Pope"  has  presented  in  Court  in  order 
to  convict,  upon  perjured  testimony,  Popes 
Adrian  IV.  a.nd  Alexander  III.  of  commit- 
ting a  most  heinous  crime  against  the  Cath- 
olic people  of  Ireland  ?  Are  our  readers 
prepared  to  give  any  credence  whatever  to 
this  Welsh  calumniator  of  the  Irish  people  ? 
We  think  not.  The  iniquitous  birth,  the 
corrupt  blood,  and  the  evil  company  kept  by 
Giraldus  Cambrensis,  at  once  stamp  him  as 
the  perjured  tool  of  King  Henry  II.,  and 
the  fitting  sycophant  to  first  concoct  the 
story  of  Pope  Adrian's  gift  of  Ireland  to 
that  disreputable  monarch  ! 


Judge  Maguire  is  cheerfully  welcome  to 
all  the  credit  he  can  achieve  by  introducing 
to  the  American  public  the  malodorous 
memory  of  Giraldus  Cambrensis,  as  his  first 
and  best  witness  against  a  Pope  who  was 
raised  up  by  Almighty  God  from  the  posi- 


21 


THK       POPK       AND       IRELAND. 


tion  of  a  beggar  boy  to  the  highest  position 
which  man  can  achieve  on  earth  !  Pupe. 
\  in  ni  IV.  was  an  Englishman,  and  the 
fact  of  his  nationality  has  been  used  by  the 
riu- iiiii-s  of  truth  in  order  to  prejudice  the 
whole  Irish  Catholic  race  against  him. 
Every  English  historian,  and  every  enemy 
alike  of  Catholicity,  Ireland,  and  truth, 
{)  trades  the  fact  that  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  was 
*' the  only  Englishman  that  ever  occupied 
the  Chair  of  Peter."  Numerous  other  na- 
tionalities have  had  but  a  single  representa- 
tive in  the  person  of  the  Vicar  of  Christ, 
but  not  a  single  biographical  or  historical 
writer  makes  allusion  to  the  fact  !  Why, 
therefore,  do  the  historians  of  England  and 
the  opponents  of  the  Papacy  in  this 
country,  so  steadfastly  harp  upon  the  fact 
that  Adrian  IV.  "  was  the  only  Englishman 
that  ever  occupied  the  Chair  of  Peter"  ? 
Simply  in  order  to  try  and  create  in  the 
hearts  of  Irish  Catholics  a  virulent  antipa- 
thy to  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  and  thus  cause  a 
schism  in  the  Catholic  Church.  Catholics, 
therefore,  should  view  with  suspicion  any 
assertions  made  by  writers  who  form 
their  false  charges  against  a  Pontiff  upon 
the  prejudices  which  they  hope  to  arouse 
through  working  upon  the  well-known  na- 
tional antipathy  which  the  Irish  people 
have  against  English  rulers  —whether  civil 
or  religious. 


The  next  witness  whom  we  shall  produce 
in  order  to  further  illustrate  the  infamous 
character  of  Giraldus  Cambrensis,  is  Mr. 
John  J.  Clancy,  whose  work,  "  Ireland  : 
As  She  Is,  As  She  Has  Been,  and  as  She 
Ought  to  Be,"  Judge  Maguire  no  doubt  is 
familiar  with.  In  the  opening  of  the  second 
chapter  of  that  work,  the  author  alludes  to 
Giraldus  Cambrensis  as  "  the  lying  Welsh- 
man," and,  in  another  portion  of  the 
volume,  he  thus  portrays  the  vile  character 
of  Judge  Maguire's  most  prominent  witness 
against  the  Popes  : 

"  Gerald  Barry  (Cambrensis),  Welshman 
by  birth,  monk  by  profession,  knave  and 
sycophant  by  nature,  was  the  first  British 
historian  to  deal  with  Anglo-Irish  affairs. 
James  A.  Froude,  Englishman  by  birth, 
ex-theologue  by  profession,  bigot  and  par- 
tisan by  temperament  and  education,  is  the 
latest  adventurer  who  has  donned  the  cap  of 
Cambrensis. 


Each  may  be  accurately  described  as  the 
hlttiirian  laureate  of  England,  bound  to  earn 
1m  purridge  t»y  praising  his  mister  through 
thick  and  thin,  and  halting  at  no  obstacle 
of  rude  fact  while  doing  so.  The  Welsh- 
man was  commissioned  by  Henry  II.  to 
j>  lint  the  Irish  as  a  lawless,  graceless,  god- 
less crew ;  so  Gerald  promptly  reported 
that  ''their  chief  characteristics  were  treach- 
ery, thirst  for  blood,  unbridled  licentious 
ness,  and  inveterate  detestation  of  order 
and  rule"  !  Of  the  scribe  who  penned  these 
words  it  has  been  said  that  he  never  spoke 
the  truth,  unless  by  accident." 

A  man  whose  moral  character  is  so  bad 
that  "hi  never  spoke  the  truth  except  by  acci- 
dent," is  hardly  up  to  the  standard  of  his- 
torians who  are  worthy  of  belief.  Cam- 
brensis may  be  good  enough  authority  for 
Judge  Maguire,  but  we  feel  assured  that 
Catholics  must  have  more  credible  and  re- 
spectable testimony  before  they  will  ad- 
judge Popes  Adrian  and  Alexander  guilty 
of  having  made  over  Ireland  to  the  murder- 
er of  Thomas  a  Becket,  on  the  testimony  of 
a  witness  who  has  the  reputation  of  "never 
having  told  the  truth  except  by  accident !" 


The  next  witness  we  will  call  in  order  to 
enlighten  Judge  Maguire  upon  the  character 
of  Cdmbrensis,  is  the  celebrated  Irish  poet 
and  historian  Thomas  Moore,  who  thus 
outlines  the  reaswns  which  should  impel  all 
impartial-minded  people  in  refusing  to  give 
credence  to  a  single  statement  made  by  this 
mercenary  maligner  of  both  the  Popes  and 
the  Irish  people.  "  In  estimating  the  value 
of  Cambrensis'  testimony,"  says  Moore,  on 
page  342  of  the  second  volume  of  his 
"History  of  Ireland,"  "the  character  of 
the  man  himself  ought  to  be  taken  into 
account ;  and,  finding  him  so  ready  a  be- 
liever and  reporter  of  all  sorts  of  physical 
marvels  and  masters,  we  should  consider 
whether  a  taste  for  the  morally  monstrous 
may  not  also  have  inspired  his  pen,  and 
induced  him  in  a  similar  manner,  to  impose 
as  well  upon  himself,  perhaps,  as  his  read- 
ers. " 


Such  is  the  estimate  which  Thomas 
Moore  places  upon  Judge  Maguire's  stal- 
wart witness.  And  now,  let  us  introduce 
into  the  Superior  Court  of  San  Francisco  the 
well-known  history  of  Thomas  Mooney, 
and  learn  the  corrupt  character  of  the  Pope- 


THE       POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


25 


libeling  Cambrensis,  as  described  by  him  in 
the  presence  of  his  Honor  James  G.  Ma- 
guire.  Here  is  Thomas  Mooney's  testimony, 
as  recorded  on  pages  107-9-11  of  his  "  His- 
tory of  Ireland"  : 

"  The  man  who  stands  conspicuous  on 
the  page  of  time,  as  the  historian  caul  tra- 
ducer  of  Ireland,  is  Gerald  Barry ,  commonly 
allied  Giraldus  Cambrensis ;  he  was  the  first 
stranger  who  undertook  to  write  a  history 
of  Ireland.  Giraldus  was  a  Welsh  priest, 
who  followed  the  fortunes  of  his  relatives 
and  friends,  in  their  invasions  of  Ireland, 
from  1169  to  1171.  Henry  the  Second  of 
England  had  made  claim  to  the  Irish  soil, 
at  the  court  of  Rome ;  he  represented  the 
Irish  people  to  Pope  Adrian  (an  English- 
man) as  destitute  of  religion,  law,  morals, 
or  government ;  and  to  support  this  repre- 
sentation, with  a  view  to  induce  the  Pope 
to  join  his  cause,  he  employed  Giraldus  to 
write  his  book.  The  Popes  of  that  epoch 
had  much  temporal  power  awarded  to  them 
by  the  nations  of  Europe.  They  were,  by 
a  kind  of  universal  consent,  referred  to  as 
arbiters  it  all  national  or  princely  disputes. 
Their  decisions  were  bowed  to  with  implicit 
obedience  by  the  whole  Christian  world. 
Hence  the  anxiety  of  Henry  to  procure  a 
corrupt  witness  against  Ireland,  which  Gir- 
aldus proved  himself  to  be.  It  appeared 
that  Henry  obtained  a  clandestine  bull 
from  Pope  Adrian,  which  (though  the 
genuineness  of  this  document  has  been  dis- 
puted by  O'Connell  and  others)  conferred 
authority  on  Henry  to  invade  Ireland,  and 
force  it  into  subjection  to  England,  and, 
through  the  English  monarch,  more  im- 
mediately than  it  had  been,  to  the  Pope. 

To  sustain  the  king,  Cambrensis  wrote  his 
"History  of  Ireland."  He  was  only  twice 
in  Ireland,  once  with  the  adventurers 
under  Strongbow,  and  once  with  Prince 
John,  the  son  of  Henry  the  Second,  both 
visits  not  occupying  more  than  eighteen 
months;  he  only  saw  about  one- third  of  the 
country  ;  he,  or  his,  durst  proceed  no  farth- 
er ;  he  understood  not  the  language  of  the 
people,  to  whom  he  was  a  total  stranger, 
and  could  not,  therefore,  consult  the  records 
of  their  ancient  archives ;  he  was  obliged  to 
substitute  inventions,  and  tales,  picked  up 
after  the  manner  of  our  modern  travellers, 
for  historical  facts  ;  he  mixed  only  with  the 
most  common  and  illiterate,  and  such  tales 
as  he  obtained  from  the  lowest,  he  distorted 
and  mixed  up  with  the  most  ridiculous  in- 
ventions of  his  own,  representing  the  people 
as  little  better  than  barbarians,  and  their 
civilization  by  conquest  a  meritorious  act. 
*  *  *  *  The  "History  of  Ireland," 
written  by  this  half-idtted  cahimniator, 
represents  the  river  Shannon  as  discharging 
itself  into  the  North  Sea,  whereas  it  dis- 


charges itself  into  the  South  or  Atlantic. 
He  scarcely  mentions  who  were  the  first 
inhabitants  of  Ireland  ;  as  to  the  Scoto- 
Milesians,  who  were  the  peaceful  possessors 
of  it  for  two  thousand  years,  he  gives  no 
account  whatever,  either  of  their  govern- 
ment, laws,  battles  or  inventions  ;  he  says, 
indeed,  there  had  been  one  hundred  and 
eighty-one  monarchs  of  that  race  before  his 
time,  but  does  not  give  us  so  much  as  their 
names. 

Such  was  the  authority  on  which  the  ma- 
jority of  subsequent  English  writers  have 
deprived  Ireland  of  her  two  thousand  years 
of  literature  and  glory.  The  learned  Abbe" 
McGeoghegan,  from  whom,  in  O'Kelly's 
translation,  I  have  condensed  some  of  the 
foregoing,  asks,  with  great  force,  "  Have 
not  the  Irish  an  equal  right  to  complain  of 
him,  as  Josephus  [in  his  first  book  against 
Appion]  complains  of  some  Greek  authors, 
who  undertook  to  compose  the  history  of 
the  Jewish  war,  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  captivity  of  the  Jews,  from  hear- 
say, without  having  ever  been  in  the 
country,  or  seen  the  things  of  which  thf  y 
wrote,  and  who,  he  said,  impudently  as- 
sumed to  themselves  the  title  of  histori- 
ans?" ****** 

Men  "  grave  and  learned"  have  adopted, 
age  after  age,  the  falsehoods  of  Cambrensis; 
have  added  to  these  falsehoods,  and  have 
piled  them  up  with  unblushing  effrontery  ; 
for  this  they  have  been  well  rewarded  with 
fat  places  and  easy  chairs  by  the  British 
government ;  and  the  worst  of  it  is,  there 
are  plenty  of  "grave  and  learned  men,"  in 
our  day,  who  pursue  the  self -same  course  in 
reference  to  unhappy  Ireland,  and  who  are 
rewarded  by  the  self-same  power  that  in- 
stigated and  rewarded  Cambrensis.  The 
works  of  this  false  witness  lay  buried  in 
obscurity  for  four  hundred  years,  until  re- 
published  by  Camden,  at  Frankfort,  in 
1602 ;  and  thus  was  the  poison  generated 
anew  through  the  mind  of  Europe.  Those 
old,  confronted,  and  discredited  falsehoods 
were  reproduced  by  the  host  of  calumnia- 
tors, who  grew  up  after  the  Reformation, 
and  who  methodically  and  unblushingly 
followed  Cambrensis,  building  up  their 
histories  on  his  fictions ;  for  the  same  mo- 
tives that  actuated  Cambrensis,  in  the 
twelfth  century,  have  guided  the  pens  of 
most  of  the  English  historians  of  Ireland, 
since  the  Reformation.  Hammer,  Campion, 
Spenser,  Camden,  and  Leland,  are  amongst 
the  most  conspicuous  of  the  English  defam- 
ers  of  Ireland  ;  whilst  it  must  be  confessed, 
with  deep  humility,  that  Ireland  has  vomi 
ted  forth  monstrosities,  who  have  under- 
taken, for  English  pay,  to  disparage  and 
vilify  the  glorious,  though  oppressed,  land 
that  bore  them." 

We  have  other  witnesses  by   whom  we 


THK       POPK       AND      IRELAND. 


might  also  prove  the  contemptible,  corrupt 
and  untruthful  character  of  Judge  Maguire's 
chief  witness,  but  we  think  it  entirely  un- 
necessary to  call  them  into  Court,  as  the 
evidence  we  have  already  adduced  is  suffici- 
ent to  satisfy  every  unprejudiced  person 
that  neither  Popes  Adrian  IV.,  Alexander 
III.  nor  the  Irish  people,  were  guilty  of  the 
crimes  he  charged  against  them.  That  is, 
Adrian  never  sent  a  Bull  to  King  Henry 
II.,  bestowing  Ireland  upon  him;  Alexan- 
der IIL  never  sent  a  Bull  sanctioning  it ; 
nor  were  the  Irish  people  the  savages  which 
this  libellous  hireling  depicted  them. 

And  now  that  we  have  torn  the  mask 
away  from  Judge  Maguire's  most  treasured 
witness,  and  shown  him  up  in  all  his  naked 
deformity,  we  will  turn  our  attention  to  the 
Bull  itself,  and  next  week  we  will  introduce 
as  our  first  witness  in  defence  of  Popes 
Adrian  and  Alexander,  his  Eminence  Car- 
dinal Moran,  whose  learned  essay  upon  that 
interesting  historical  question  is  purposely 
deprecated  by  the  prejudiced  author  of 
"  Ireland  and  the  Pope,"  for  the  sole  pur- 
pose of  undermining  its  influence  and  pre- 
disposing Irish  Catholic  readers  to  reject  its 
truthful  statements. 

The  name  of  Cardinal  Moran  carries  with 
it  great  weight.  He  is  among  the  most 
ardent  Irish  patriots  that  ever  wore  a  mitre. 


As  an  Irish  annalist  and  student  of  Irish 
ecclesiastical  history  he  has  no  ecjual  in  our 
day.  He  has  made  the  question  of  the 
genuineness  or  the  fraudulency  of  the  sup- 
posed Bull  of  Pope  Adrian  to  Henry  II., 
the  subject  of  close  study  for  a  number  of 
years.  His  Eminence  visited  Rome  fre- 
quently in  order  to  search  among  the  Vati- 
can Archives  for  documents  bearing  on  this 
great  Irish  Catholic  question,  and  he  spi  nt 
much  valuable  time  in  compiling  authorities 
which  add  great  weight  to  his  able  argu- 
ment, which,  by  the  way,  Judge  Maguire 
superciliously  throws  asHe  with  the  curt 
and  caustic  criticism  that  it  is  "a  very  in- 
genious but  radically  defective  essay.'' 

Notwithstanding  Judge  Maguire's  ipse 
dixit,  however,  our  Catholic  readers  have 
sufficient  intelligence  to  peruse,  digeat,  and 
decide  for  themselves  whether  Cardinal 
Moran's  able  contribution  in  defence  of  the 
supposed  criminals  whom  Judge  Maguire 
has  prejudged  and  condemned,  is  the  "  de- 
fective essay"  the  author  of  "Ireland  and 
the  Pope"  designates  it,  or  an  unanswerable 
argument  in  proof  of  the  fact  that  Henry 
II.  of  England,  and  some  of  his  courtiers, 
f&rged  the  so-called  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian 
IV.  in  order  to  frame  for  him  and  them  an 
excuse  for  invading  Ireland. 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


27 


CHAPTER    IV. 

? 

Pope  Adrian's  Bull  Proved  Fictitious  by  Cardinal  Moran.  —  An   Able   Historical  Essay. 
Conclusive  Proofs  that  the  Bull  was  a  Forgery. 


There  was  a  time  when  it  would  be  little 
less  than  treason  to  question  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  Bull  by  which  Pope  Adrian  IV. 
is  supposed  to  have  made  a  grant  of  Ireland 
to  Henry  the  Second;  and,  indeed  from  the 
first  half  of  the  thirteenth  to  the  close  of 
the  fifteenth  century,  it  was  principally 
through  this  supposed  grant  of  the  Holy 
See  that  the  English  Government  sought 
to  justify  their  claim  to  hold  dominion  in 
our  island.  However,  opinions  and  times 
have  changed,  and  at  the  present  day  this 
Bull  of  Adrian  has  as  little  bearing  on  the 
connection  between  England  and  this  coun- 
try, as  it  could  possibly  have  on  the  union 
of  the  Isle  of  Man  with  Great  Britain. 

On  the  other  hand,  many  strange  things 
have  been  said  during  the  past  months  in 
the  so-called  nationalist  journals,  while  as- 
serting the  genuineness  of  this  famous 
Bull.  I  need  scarcely  remark  that  it  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  the  love  either  of 
our  poor  country  or  of  historic  truth  that 
inspired  their  declamation.  It  proceed- 
ed mainly  from  their  hatred  to  the  Sov- 
ereign Pontiff,  and  from  the  vain  hope 
that  such  exaggerated  statements  might 
in  some  way  weaken  the  devoted  affec- 
tion of  our  people  for  Rome. 

Laying  aside  such  prejudiced  opinions, 
the  controversy  as  to  the  genuineness  of 
Adrian's  Bull  should  be  viewed  in  a  purely 
historical  light,  and  its  decision  must  de- 
pend on  the  value  and  weight  of  the  histor- 
ical arguments  which  may  be  advanced  to 
sustain  it. 

The  following  is  a  literal  translation  of 
the  old 

LATIN  TEXT    OF  ADRIAN'S  BULL: 

"Adrian,  Bishop,  servant  of  the  servants  of 
God.  to  our  most  dear  Son  in  Christ,  the  illustri- 
ous King  of  the  English,  greeting  and  the  Apos- 
tolical Benediction. 

"The  thoughts  of  Your  Highness  are  laudably 
and  profitably  directed  to  the  greater  glory  of 
your  name  on  earth  and  to  the  increase  of  the 
reward  of  eternal  happiness  in  heaven,  when  as 
a  Catholic  Prince  you  propose  to  yourself  to  ex- 
tend the  borders  of  the  Church,  to  announce  the 
truths  of  Christian  Faith  to  ignorant  and  bar- 
barous nations,  and  to  root  out  the  weeds  of 
wickedness  from  the  field  of  the  Lord;  and  the 
more  effectually  to  accomplish  this,  you  implore 
the  counsel  and  favor  of  the  Apostolic  See.  In 
which  matter  we  feel  assured  that  the  higher 
your  aims  are,  and  the  more  discreet  your  pro- 
ceedings, the  happier,  with  God's  aid,  will  be  the 
result;  because  those  undertakings  that  proceed 
from  the  ardor  of  faith  and  the  love  of  religion 


are  sure  always  to  have  a  prosperous  end  and  is- 
sue. 

"It  is  beyond  aU  doubt,  as  your  Highness  also 
doth  acknowledge,  that  Ireland,  and  all  the  is- 
lands upon  which  Christ  the  Sun  of  Justice  has 
shone,  and  which  have  received  the  knowledge 
of  the  Christian  faith,  are  subject  to  the  author- 
ity of  St.  Peter  and  of  the  most  Holy  Roman 
Church.  Wherefore  we  are  the  more  desirous  to 
sow  iu  them  an  acceptable  seed  and  a  plantation 
pleasing  unto  God,  because  we  know  that  a  most 
rigorous  account  of  them  shall  be  required  of  us 
hereafter. 

"Now,  most  dear  Son  in  Christ,  you  have  sig- 
nified to  us  that  you  propose  to  enter  the  island 
of  Ireland  to  establish  the  observance  of  law 
among  its  people,  and  to  eradicate  the  weeds  of 
vice;  and  that  you  are  willing  to  pay  from  every 
house  one  penny  as  an  annual  tribute  to  St.  Pe- 
ter, and  to  preserve  the  rights  of  the  churches  of 
that  land,  whole  and  inviolate.  We,  therefore, 
receiving  with  due  favor  your  pious  and  laudable 
desires,  and  graciously  granting  our  consent  to 
your  petition,  declare  that  it  is  pleasing  and  ac- 
ceptable to  us,  that  for  the  purpose  of  enlarging 
the  limits  of  the  Church,  setting  bounds  to  the 
torrent  of  vice,  reforming  evil  manners,  planting 
the  seeds  of  virtue  and  increasing  Christian 
faith,  you  should  enter  that  island  and  carry  into 
effect  those  things  which  belong  to  the  service  of 
God  and  to  the  salvation  of  that  people;  and  that 
the  people  of  that  land  should  honorably  receive 
and  reverence  you  as  Lord;  the  rights  of  the 
churches  being  preserved  untouched  and  entire, 
and  reserving  the  annual  tribute  of  one  penny 
from  every  house  to  St.  Peter  and  the  most  Hcly 
Roman  Church. 

"If,  therefore,  you  resolve  to  carry  these  de- 
signs into  execution,  let  it  be  your  study  to  form 
that  people  to  good  morals,  and  take  such  orders 
both  by  yourself  and  by  those  whom  you  shall 
find  qualified  in  faith,  in  words,  and  in  conduct, 
that  the  Church  there  may  be  adorned,  and  the 
practices  of  Christian  faith  be  planted  and  in- 
creased; and  let  all  that  tends  to  the  glory  of 
God  and  the  salvation  of  souls  be  so  ordered  by 
you  that  you  may  deserve  to  obtain  from  God  an 
increase  of  everlasting  reward,  and  may  secure 
on  earth  a  glorious  name  throughout  all  time. 
Given  at  Rome,"  &c. 

SOME  PRELIMINARY  REMARKS. 

Before  we  proceed  with  the  inquiry  as 
to  the  genuineness  of  this  letter  of  Pope 
Adrian,  I  must  detain  the  reader  with  a 
few  brief  preliminary  remarks. — First: 
Some  passages  of  this  important  document 
have  been  very  unfairly  dealt  with  by  mod- 
ern writers  while  purporting  to  discuss  its 
merits.  Thus,  for  instance,  Prof.  Richey, 
in  his  "Lectures  on  Irish  History,"  present- 
ing a  translation  of  the  Latin  text  to  the 
lady  pupils  of  the  Alexandra  College, 
makes  the  Pontiff  to  write:  "You  have 
signified  to  us,  our  well-beloved  son  in 


28 


THE       POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


Christ,  that  you  propose  to  enter  the  island 
of  Ireland  in  order  to  subdue  the  people, 
etc.  ....  We  therefore,  regarding 
your  pious  and  laudable  design  with  clue 
ifavor,  etc.,  do  hereby  declare  our  will  and 
pleasure,  that  for  the  purpose  of  enlarging 
the  borders  of  the  Church,  etc.,  you  do  en- 
ter and  take  possession  of  that  island."* 
Such  an  erroneous  translation  must  be  the 
more  blamed  in  the  present  instance,  as  it 
was  scarcely  to  be  expected  that  the  ladies 
whom  the  learned  lecturer  addressed 
would  have  leisure  to  consult  the  original 
Latin  text,  or  the  document  which  he  pro- 
fessed to  translate.  This,  however,  is  not 
the  only  error  into  which  Professor  Richey 
has  been  betrayed  regarding  the  Bull  of 
Adrian  IV.  Having  mentioned  in  a  note 
the  statement  of  Roger  de  Wendover,  that 
the  Bull  was  obtained  from  Pope  Adrian 
in  the  year  1155,  he  adds  his  own  opinion 
that  "the  grant  appears  to  have  been  made 
in  1172."f  However,  at  that  date,  Pope 
Adrian  had  been  for  about  thirteen  years 
freed  from  the  cares  of  his  Pontificate, 
having  passed  to  a  better  world  in  the  year 
1159. 

Second :  Any  one  who  attentively  weighs 
the  words  of  the  above  document  will  see 
at  once  that  it  precinds  from  all  title  of 
conquest,  while  at  the  same  time  it  makes 
no  gift  of  transfer  of  dominion  to  Henry 
the  Second.  As  far  as  this  letter  of  Adrian 
is  concerned,  the  visit  of  Henry  to  our  is- 
land might  be  the  enterprise  of  a  friendly 
monarch,  who,  at  the  invitation  of  a  dis- 
tracted State,  would  seek  by  his  presence 
to  restore  peace,  and  to  uphold  the  obser- 
servance  of  the  laws.  Thus,  those  foolish 
theories  must  be  at  once  set  aside  which 
rest  on  the  groundless  supposition  that 
Pope  Adrian  authorized  the  invasion  and 
plunder  of  our  people  by  the  Anglo-Nor- 
man adventurers. 

Third:  There  is  another  serious  error 
which  must  also  be  set  at  rest  by  the  sim- 
ple perusal  of  the  above  document.  I 
mean  that  opinion  which  would  fain  set 
forth  the  letter  of  Pope  Adrian  as  a  dogma- 
tical definition  of  the  Holy  See,  aa  if  the 
Sovereign  Pontiff  then  spoke  ex  cathedra 
i.  e.,  solemnly  propounded  some  doctrine 
to  be  believed  by  the  Universal  Church 
Now  it  is  manifest  from  the  letter  itself 
that  it  has  none  of  the  conditions  required 
for  a  definition  ex  cathedra;  it  is  not  ad- 
dressed to  the  Universal  Church;  it  propos- 
es no  matter  of  faith  to  be  held  by  all  the 
children  of  Christ;  in  fact  it  presents  no 

*  "Lecture  on  the  History  of  Ireland,"  by 
A.  G.  Kichey,  Esq.,  delivered  to  the  pupils 
of  the  Alexandra  College  during  the  Hilary 
and  Easter  Terms  of  1869.  Dublin,  1869, 
pages  122,  123. 

t  Ibid,  page  121. 


doctrine  whatever  to  be  believed  by  the 
faithful,  and  it  is  nothing  more  than  a 
commendatory  letter  addressed  to  Henry, 
resting  on  the  good  intentions  set  forth  by 
that  monarch  himself.  There  i.-  one  max- 
im, indeed,  which  awakens  the  suspicions 
of  the  old  Gallican  school,  viz.:  that  "all 
the  islands  are  subject  to  the  authority  of 
St.  Peter."  However  it  is  no  doctrinal 
teaching  that  is  thus  propounded;  it  is  a 
matter  of  fact  admitted  by  Henry  himself, 
a  principle  recognized  by  the  international 
law  of  Europe  in  the  Middle  Ages,  a  maxim 
set  down  by  the  various  States,  the  better 
to  maintain  peace  and  concord  among  the 
princes  of  Christendom.  To  admit,  how- 
ever or  to  call  in  question  the  teaching  of 
the  civil  law  of  Europe,  as  embodied  in  that 
maxim,  has  nothing  whatever  to  say  to  the 
great  prerogative  of  St.  Peter's  successors, 
while  they  solemnly  propound  to  the  faith- 
ful, in  unerring  accents,  the  doctrines  of 
Divine  faith. 

Fourth:  To  many  it  will  seem  a  para- 
dox, and  yet  it  is  a  fact,  that  the  supposed 
Bull  of  Pope  Adrian  had  no  part  what- 
ever in  the  submission  of  the  Irish  chief- 
tains to  Henry  the  Second.  Even  ac- 
cording to  those  who  maintain  its  genuine- 
ness, this  Bull  was  not  published  till  the 
year  1175,  and  certainly  no  mention  of  it 
was  made  in  Ireland  till  long  after  the 
submission  of  the  Irish  princes.  Tlie 
successes  of  the  Anglo-Normans  were 
mainly  due  to  a  far  different  cause,  viz.,  to 
the  superior  military  skill  and  equipment 
of  the  invaders.  Among  the  Anglo-Nor- 
man leaders  were  some  of  the  bravest 
knights  of  the  kingdom,  who  had  wtm 
their  laurels  in  the  wars  of  France  and 
Wales.  Their  weapons  and  armor  render- 
ed it  almost  impossible  for  the  Irish  troops 
to  meet  them  in  the  open  field.  The 
crossbow,  which  was  made  use  of  for  the 
first  time  in  this  invasion,  produced  as 
great  a  change  in  military  tactics  as  the 
rifled  cannon  in  our  own  days.  When 
Henry  came  in  person  to  Ireland  his  num 
erous  army  hushed  all  opposition.  There 
were  400  vessels  in  his  fleet,  and  if  a  min- 
imum of  twenty-five  armed  men  be  allow<  d 
for  each  vessel,  we  will  have  an  army  of  at 
least  10,000  men  fully  equipped,  landing 
unopposed  on  the  southern  shores  of  our 
island. J  It  is  to  this  imposing  force,  and 
the  armor  of  the  Anglo-Norman  knights, 
that  we  must,  in  great  part,  refer  whatever 
success  attended  this  invasion  of  the  Eng- 
lish monarch. 


t  The  authorities  for  the  statements  made 
in  the  text  may  be  seen  in  Macariae  Excidium 
edited  by  Mr.  O'Callagban  for  the  K.  I.  A., 
in  1850. 


THE     POPE     AND     IRELAND. 


29 


HISTORICAL  CRITICISMS  ON   THE  BULL. 

To  proceed  now  with  the  immediate 
matter  of  our  present  historical  inquiry, 
the  following  is  the  summary  of  the  argu- 
ments in  favor  of  the  authenticity  of  Pope 
Adrian's  letter,  inserted  in  the  Irishman 
newspaper  of  June  8  last,  by  J.  C.  O'Cal- 
laghan,  Esq.,  editor  of  the  Macariae  Ex- 
cidium,  and  author  of  many  valuable 
works  on  Irish  history:  "We  have,  firstly 
the  testimony  of  John  of  Salisbury,  Secre- 
tary to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and 
one  of  the  ablest  writers  of  the  day,  who 
relates  hia  having  been  the  envoy  from 
Henry  to  Adrian,  in  1155,  to  ask  for  a 
grant  of  Ireland,  and  such  a  grant  having 
been  then  obtained,  accompanied  by  a  gold 
ring,  containing  a  fine  emerald,  as  a  token 
of  investure,  with  which  grant  and  ring  the 
said  John  returned  to  Henry.  We  have, 
secondly,  the  grant  or  Bull  of  Adrian,  in 
extenso,  in  theworksof  GiraldusCambren- 
sirt,  and  his  contemporary  Radulfus  de 
Diceto,  Dean  of  London,  as  well  as  in  those 
of  Roger  de  Wendover,  and  Mathew  Paris. 
We  have,  thirdly,  several  Bulls  of  Adrian's 
successor,  Pope  Alexander  III.,  still  further 
to  the  purport  of  Adrian's,  or  in  Henry's 
favor.  We  have,  fourthly,  the  recorded 
public  reading  of  the  Bulls  of  Adrian  and 
Alexander,  at  a  meeting  of  Bishops  in 
Waterford  in  1175.  We  have,  fifthly, 
after  the  liberation  of  Scotland  from  Eng- 
land at  Bannockburn,  and  the  consequent 
invitation  of  Bruce's  brother  Ed  ward,  to  be 
King  of  Ireland,  the  Bull  of  Adrian  pre- 
fixed to  the  eloquent  lay  remonstrance, 
which  the  Irish  presented  to  Pope  John 
XXII.  against  the  English;  the  same  Bull 
moreover,  referred  to  in  the  remonstrance, 
itself  as  so  ruinous  to  Ireland;  and  a  copy 
of  that  Bull,  accordingly  sent  back  by  the 
Pope  to  Edward  II.  of  England,  for  his  use 
under  those  circumstances.  We  have, 
sixthly,  from  Cardinal  Baronius,  in  his 
great  work,  the  Annales  Ecclesiastici, 
under  Adrian  IV.,  his  grant  of  Ireland  to 
his  countrymen  in  full,  or,  as  is  said,  'ex- 
codice  Vaticano,  diploma  datum  ad 
Henricum,  Anglorum,  Regem.  We  have 
seventhly,  the  Bull  in  the  Bullarium  Ro- 
manum,  as  printed  in  Rome  in  1739.  The 
citations  and  references  in  support  of  all 
the  foregoing  statements  will  be  found  in 
the  'Notes  and  Illustrations'  of  my  edition 
of  Macariae  Excidium  for  the  Irish  Ar- 
chaeological Society  in  1850,  given  in  such 
a  manner  as  must  satisfy  the  most  skepti- 
ca'." 


testimony  of  John  of  Salisbury,  who,  in  his 
Metalogicus  (lib.  iv.,  cap.  42,)  writes,  that 
being  in  an  official  capacity  at  the  Papal 
Court,  in  1155,  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  then 
granted  the  investure  of  Ireland  to  the  il- 
lustrious King  Henry  II.  of  England. 

I  do  not  wish  in  any  way  to  detract  from 
the  praise  due  to  John  of  Salisbury,  who 
was  at  this  time  one  of  the  ablest  courtiers 
of  Henry  II.  However,  the  words  here 
imputed  to  him  must  be  taken  with  great 
reserve.  Inserted  as  they  are  in  the  last 
chapter  of  his  work,  they  are  not  at  all  re- 
quired by  the  context;  by  cancelling  them 
the  whole  passage  runs  smoother  and  is 
more  connected  in  every  way.  This  is 
more  striking,  as  in  another  work  of  the 
same  writer,  which  is  entitled  Polycraticus 
we  meet  with  a  detailed  account  of  the 
various  incidents  of  his  embassy  to  Pope 
Adrian,  yet  he  tbere  makes  no  mention  of 
the  Bull  in  Henry's  favor,  or  of  the  gold 
ring  and  its  fine  emerald,  or  of  the  grant 
of  Ireland,  all  of  which  would  have  been 
so  important  for  bis  narrative. 

We  must  also  hold  in  mind  the  time 
when  the  Metalogicus  was  written.  The 
author  himself  fixes  its  date;  for  immedi- 
ately before  asking  the  prayers  of  "those 
who  read  his  book,  and  those  who  hear  it 
read,"  he  tells  us  that  the  news  of  Pope 
Abrian's  death  had  reached  him  a  little 
time  before,  and  he  adds  that  his  own 
patron,  Theobald,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury though  still  living,  was  weighed  down 
by  many  infirmities,  f  Now,  Pope  Adrian 
departed  this  life  in  1159,  and  the  death  of 
Archbishop,  Theobald  happened  in  1161. 
Hence,  Gile  and  other  editors  of  John  of 
Salisbury's  works,  without  a  dissentient 
voice,  refer  the  Metalogicus  to  the  year 
1159. 


THE  TESTIMONY  ANALYZED. 

Examining  these  arguments  in  detail.  I 
will  follow  the  order  thus  marked  out  by 
Mr.  O'Callaghan. 

I. — We  meet,   in   the  first    place,   the 


QUEER   ACTION  OF  HENKY  H. 

Now,  it  is  a  matter  beyond  the  reach  of 
controversy,  that  if  Henry  the  Second  ob- 
tained the  investiture  of  Ireland  from 
Adrian  IV.,  he  kept  this  grant  a  strict  se- 
cret till  at  least  the  year  1175.  For  twenty 
years,  i.  e.,  from  1155  to  1175,  no  men- 
tion was  made  of  the  gift  of  Adrian.  Henry 
did  not  refer  to  it  when  authorizing  his 
vassals  to  join  Diarmaid  in  1167,  when 
Adrian's  Bull  would  have  been  so  oppor- 
tune to  justify  his  intervention;  he  did  not 
mention  it  when  he  himself  set  out  for  Ire- 
tand  to  solicit  and  receive  the  homage  of 
the  Irish  princes;  he  did  not  even  refer  to 
it  when  he  assumed  his  new  title  and  ac- 
complished the  purpose  of  his  expedition. 
The  Council  of  Cashel  in  1172  was  the  first 
episcopal  assembly  after  Henry's  arrival 
in  Ireland;  the  Papal  Legate  was  present 

t  Metalogicus,  lib.  iv.  cap.  ult. 


30 


THE       POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


there,  and  did  Adrian's  Bull  exist  it  should 
necessarily  have  engaged  the  attention  of 
the  assembled  Fathers.  Nevertheless,  not 
a  whisper  as  to  Adrian's  grant  was  to  be 
heard  at  that  famous  Council.  Even  the 
learned  editor  of  "Cambrensis  Eversus" 
while  warmly  asserting  the  genuineness  of 
Adrian's  Bull,  admits  "there  is  not  any, 
even  the  slightest  authority,  for  asserting 
that  its  existence  was  known  in  Ireland  be- 
fore the  year  1172,  or  for  three  years  later" 
— vol  ii.,  p.  440,  note  z).  It  is  extremely 
difficult,  in  any  hypothesis,  to  explain  in  a 
satisfactory  way  this  mysterious  silence  of 
Henry  the  Second,  nor  is  it  easy  to  under- 
stand how  a  fact  so  important,  so  vital  to 
the  interests  of  Ireland,  could  remain  so 
many  years  concealed  from  those  who 
ruled  the  destinies  of  the  Irish  Church. 
For,  we  must  hold  in  mind  that  through- 
put that  interval  Ireland  numbered  among 
its  Bishops  one  who  held  the  important  of- 
fice of  Legate  of  the  Holy  See;  our  Church 
had  constant  intercourse  with  England 
and  the  continent,  and  through  St.  Law- 
rence O'Toole  and  a  hundred  other  distin- 
guished Prelates,  enjoyed  in  the  fullest 
manner  the  confidence  of  Rome. 

HISTORICAL     CONTRADICTIONS     CONSIDERED. 

If  Adrian  granted  this  Bull  to  Henry  at 
the  solicitation  of  John  cf  Salisbury  in  1155 
there  is  but  one  explanation  for  the  sil-  nee 
of  this  courtier  in  his  diary,  as  set  fi-rth  in 
the  Pbfycraticus,  and  for  the  conceal  men  t 
of  the  Bull  iteelf  from  the  Irish  Bishops 
and  people,  viz.,  that  this  secrecy  was  re- 
quired by  the  State  policy  of  the  English 
monarch.  And,  if  it  be  so,  how  then  can 
we  be  asked  to  admit  as  genuine  this  pas- 
sage of  the  Metalogicus,  in  which  the  as- 
tute agent  of  Henry,  still  continuing  to  dis- 
charge offices  of  the  highest  trust  in  the 
Court,  would  proclaim  to  the  world  as 
early  as  the  year  1159,  that  Pope  Adrian 
hfed  made  this  formal  grant  of  Ireland  to 
his  royal"  master,  and  that  the  solemn  rec- 
ord ofthe  investiture  of  this  high  dignity 
was  preserved  in  the  public  archives  ofthe 
kingdom? 

It  must  also  be  added  that  there  are  some 
phrases  in  this  passage  of  the  Metalogicus 
which  manifestly  betray  the  hand  of  the 
impostor.  Thus  the  words  usque  in  hodier- 
num  diem  imply  that  a  long  interval  had 
elapsed  since  the  concession  was  made  by 
Pope  Adrian,  and  surely  they  could  not 
have  been  penned  by  John  of  Salisbury  in 
1159.  Much  1«  ss  can  we  suppose  that  this 
writer  employed  the  words  jure  hoeredit- 
ario  possidendam.  No  such  hereditary 
right  is  granted  in  the  Bull  of  Adrian.  It 
was  not  dreamt  of  even  during  the  first  of 
the  Anglo-Norman  invasion,  and  it  was 
only  at  a  later  period,  when  the  Irish 


chieftains  scornfully  rejected  the  Anglo- 
Norman  law  of  hereditary  succession,  that 
this  expedient  was  thought  of  for  allaying 
the  fierce  opposition  of  our  people. 

Thus  we  are  forced  to  regard  the  sup- 
posed testimony  of  John  of  Salisbury  aa 
nothing  more  than  a  clumsy  interpolation, 
which  probably  was  not  inserted  in  his 
work  till  many  years  after  the  first  Anglo- 
Norman  invasion  of  our  island. 

THE  MAIN  ARGUMENT  CONSIDERED. 

I  now  come  to  the  second  and  main  ar- 
gument of  those  who  seek 'to  defend  the 
authenticity  of  Pope  Adrian's  Bull.  We 
have  Giraldus  Cambrensis,  they  say,  a 
contemporary  witness,  whose  testimony  is 
unquestionable.  He  asserts  in  full  this  let- 
ter of  Adrian  IV.  and  he  nowhere  betrays 
the  slightest  doubt  in  regard  to  its  genu- 
ineness. 

Some  years  ago  we  might  perhaps  have 
accepted  this  flattering  character  of  Gi- 
raldus Cambrensis,  but  at  the  present  day, 
and  since  the  publication  of  an  accurate 
<<lition  of  his  historical  works,  it  is  impos- 
sible for  us  to  do  so. 

It  was  not  till  mnny  years  after  the 
death  of  Pope  Adrian  that  Gerald  de  Barry, 
better  known  by  the  name  of  Giraldus 
Cambrensis,  entered  on  the  stage  of  Irish 
history.  Twice  he  visited  Ireland  after  the 
year  1183,  and  on  both  occasions  he  dis- 
charged those  duties  which,  at  the  present 
day,  would  merit  for  him  the  title  of  spe- 
cial court  correspondent  with  the  invading 
army.  The  Expugnatio  Hibernica,  in 
which  he  inserts  Adrian's  Bull,  may  justly 
he  said  to  have  been  written  to  order. 
Hence,  as  a  matter  of  course,  Giraldus 
adopted  in  it  as  genuine  every  document 
set  forth  as  such  by  his  royal  master,  and 
any  statements  that  strengthened  the 
claim,  or  promoted  the  interests  of  his 
brother  Welsh  adventurers  were  sure  not 
to  be  too  nicely  weighed  in  the  scales  of 
criticism  by  such  an  historian.  The  editor 
of  the  works  of  Giraldus,  just  now  pub- 
lished under  the  direction  of  the  Master  of 
the  Rolls,  has  fully  recognized  this  spe- 
cial feature  of  the  historical  writings  of 
Giraldus.  The  official  catalogue  describ  ng 
the  Expugnatio  Hibernica,  of  which  we 
treat,  expressly  says:  "It  may  be  regarded 
rather  as  a  great  epic  than  a  sober  rela- 
tion of  facts  occurring  in  his  own  days.  No 
one  can  peruse  it  without  coming  to  the 
conclusion  that  it  is  rather  a  poetical  fic- 
tion than  a  prosaic  truthful  history." 

GIRALDUS  CAMBRENSIS   CORNERED. 

In  the  preface  to  the  fifth  volume  of  the 
Historical  Treatises  of  Giraldus,  the 
learned  editor,  Rev.  James  F.  Dimpck,  en- 
ters at  considerable  length  into  the  inquiry, 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


31 


whether,  the  Expugnatio  Hibernica  was 
to  be  accepted  as  genuine  and  authentic 
history.  1  need  do  no  more  than  state  the 
conclusions  which  he  enunciates: 

"I  think  I  have  said  enough  to  justify 
me  in  refusing  to  accept  Giraldus'  history 
of  the  Irish  and  of  their  English  invaders 
as  sober,  truthful  history."  And  again  he 
writes:  "My  good  friend  and  pre-laborer 
in  editing  these  volumes  ofGiraldus'  works 
(Mr.  Brewer)  says  of  the  Expugnatio, 
that  Giraldus  would  seem  to  have  re- 
garded his  subject  rather  as  a  great  epic, 
which  undoubtedly  it  was,  than  a  sober 
relation  of  facts  occurring  in  his  own 
days 

This  is  a  most  true  and  characteristic 
description  ofGiraldus'  treatment  of  his  sub- 
ject; the  treatise  certainly  is,  in  great 
measure,  rather  a  poetical  fiction  than  a 
prosaic  truthful  history." 

I  must  further  remark  as  another  result 
from  Rev.  Mr.  Dimock's  rssearches,  that 
the  old  text  of  Giraldus  in  reference  to 
Pope  Adrian's  Bull,  from  which  Mr. 
O'Callaghan's  citations  are  made,  is  now 
proved  to  be  singularly  defective.  I  will 
give  the  pithy  words  of  that  learned  editor, 
which  are  stronger  than  any  I  would  wish 
to  use:  "-ZVo  more  absurd  nonsensical  a 
muddle  ivas  ever  blundered  into  by  the 
most  stupid  of  abbreviators."  It  is  of 
course  from  the  ancient  MSS.  of  the  work 
that  this  corruption  of  the  old  text  is  mainly 
proved;  but  it  should  indeed  be  apparent 
from  an  attentive  study  of  the  very  printed 
text  itself,  for,  as  Mr.Dimock  remarks,  be- 
ing accurately  translated,  its  words  "mar- 
vellously contrive  to  make  Henry,  in 
1172,  apply  for  and  procure  this  privilege 
from  Pope  Adrian,  who  died  in  1159, 
and  with  'equally  marvellous  confusion 
they  represent  John  of  Salisbury,  who  had 
been  Henry's  agent  in  procuring  this  priv- 
ilege in  1155,  as  sent,  not  to  Ireland,  but 
to  Rome,  for  the  purpose  of  publishing  the 
Bull  at  Waterford  in  1174  or  1175." 

I  will  only  add,  regarding  the  testimony 
of  Giraldus  Cambrensis,  that  in  the  genu- 
ine text  of  the  Expugnatio  Hibernica  he 
places  on  the  same  level  the  Bull  of  Adrian 
IV.  and  that  of  Alexander  III.  Neverthe- 
less, as  we  will  just  now  see  he  elsewhere 
admits  that  there  were  many  and  grave 
suspicions  that  the  supposed  Bull  of  Alex- 
ander had  never  been  granted  by  the  Holy 
See. 

OTHER  AUTHORITIES  ANALYZED. 

The  other  names  mentioned  together 
with  Giraldus  will  not  detain  us  long. 
They  are  all  writers  who  only  incidentally 
make  reference  to  Irish  matters,  and  in 
these  they  naturally  enough  take  Giraldus 
for  their  guide. 


Ralph  de  Diceto  wrote  about  1210,  and 
like  Giraldus,  received  his  honors  at  the 
hands  of  Henry  the  Second.  Irish  histo- 
rians have  not  yet  accepted  him  as  a  guide 
in  reference  to  matters  connected  with 
our  country.  For  instance,  the  Synod  of 
Cashel  of  1172,  which  was  one  of  the  most 
important  events  of  that  period  of  our  his- 
tory, is  described  by  him  as  held  in  Lis- 
more. 

Roger  de  Wendover  was  a  monk  of  St. 
Alban's,  who  died  6th  of  May,  1237.  His 
Flares  Historiarum  begin  with  the  crea- 
tion of  the  world,  and  end  two  years  be- 
fore his  death,  in  1235.  He  merely  com- 
pendiates  other  sources  down  to  the  begin- 
ning of  the  13th  century.  It  is  only  the 
subsequent  portion  of  his  work  which  is 
held  in  esteem  by  our  annalists. 

Mathew  Paris  was  a  brother  religious  of 
Roger  de  Wendover,  in  St.  Albans,  where 
he  died  in  1259.  Mr.  Cpxe,  who  edited  a 
portion  of  the  Flores  Historiarum  for  the 
English  Historical  Society  (1841-1844),  has 
proved  that  down  to  the  year  1235  Mathew 
Paris  only  commendiates  the  work  of  Wen- 
dover. At  all  events  his  Historia  Major 
is  of  very  little  weight.  A  distinguished 
German  historian  of  the  present  day, 
Scrhodl,  thus  conveys  his  strictures  on  its 
merits: 

"Se  trompe  a  chaque  instant,  et,  en- 
traine,  par  son  evaugle  rage  de  critique, 
donne  pour  des  faits  historigues  des  anec- 
dotes piquantes  qui  n'ont  aucune  authen- 
ticite,  des  legendes,  deraisonnables  et  toutes 
sortes  de  details  suspacts,  exageres  et  cal- 
omnieax. 

To  the  testimony  of  such  writers  we  may 
well  oppose  the  silence  of  Peter  de  Blois, 
Secretary  of  Henry  the  Second,  though 
chronicling  the  chief  events  of  Henry's 
reign,  and  the  silence  of  all  our  native  an- 
nalists, not  one  of  whom  ever  mentions 
the  Bull  of  Adrian. 

THE  THIRD  ARGUMENT  CONSIDERED. 

But  it  is  time  to  pass  on  to  the  third  ar- 
gument which  is  advanced  by  our  oppon- 
ents. It  is  quite  true  that  we  have  some 
letters  or  Bulls  of  Pope  Alexander  III., 
connected  with  the  Irish  invasion.  Three 
of  these,  written  in  1172,  are  certainly  au- 
thentic. They  are  preserved  in  the"Liber 
Niger  Scaccarii"  from  which  they  were 
edited  by  Hearne,  and  in  later  times  they 
have  been  accurately  printed  by  Mr. 
O'Callaghan  and  Rev.  Dr.  Kelly.  They  are 
addressed  respectfully  to  the  Irish  Bishops, 
King  Henry  and  the  Irish  princes.  So 
far,  however,  are  these  letters  from  cor- 
roborating the  genuineness  of  Pope  Adri- 
an's Bull,  that  they  furnish  an  unanswer- 
able argument  for  wholly  setting  it  aside  as 
groundless  and  unauthentic.  They  are  en- 


32 


THE       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


tirt-ly  devoted  to  the  circumstances  of  the 
invasion  of  our  island  and  its  n  suits,  and 
yet  the  only  title  that  they  recognize  is 
''that  monarch's  power  and  the  submission 
of  the  Irish  chieftains."  They  simply  ig- 
nore any  Bull  of  Adrian,  and  any  investi- 
ture from  the  Holy  See. 

BULL  OF  POPE  ALEXANDER  III. 

There  is,  however,  another  Bull  of  Alex- 
ander III.  preserved  byGiraldus  Cambren- 
sia,  which  he  supposed  to  have  been 
granted  at  the  request  of  King  Henry  in 
1172,  and  is  confirmatory  of  the  gift  and 
investiture  made  by  Pope  Adrian.  Mr. 
O'Callaghan  holds  that  this  Bull  of  Alex- 
ander III.  sets  at  rest  forever  all  doubt  as 
to  the  genuineness  of  the  grant  made  by 
Adrian  IV. 

The  question  at  once  suggests  itself:  la 
this  Bull  of  Alexander  III.  to  be  admitted 
as  genuine  and  authentic?  If  its  own  au- 
thority be  doubtful,  surely  it  cannot  suffice 
to  prop  up  the  tottering  cause  of  Adrian's 
Bull.  Now  its  style  is  entirely  different 
from  that  of  the  three  authentic  letters  of 
which  we  have  just  spoken.  Quite  in  op- 
position to  these  letters,  "the  only  author- 
ity alleged  in  it  for  Henry's  right  to  Ire- 
land is  the  Bull  of  Adrian"  as  Dr.  Lani- 
gan  allows.  The  genuine  letters  are  dated 
from  Tusculum,  where,  as  we  know  from 
other  sources,  Alexander  actually  resided 
in  1172.  On  the  other  hand,  this  confirm- 
atory Bull,  though  supposed  to  have  been 
obtained  in  1172  is  dated  from  Rome,  thus 
clearly  betraying  the  hand  of  the  impostor. 
Such  was  the  disturbed  condition  of  Rome 
at  that  period  that  it  was  impossible  for 
His  Holiness  to  reside  there;  and  hence 
we  find  him  sometimes  holding  his  Court 
in  Tusculum,  at  other  times  in  Segni, 
Anagni,  or  Ferrara.  It  was  only  when 
these  disturbances  were  quelled  that  Alex- 
ander III.  was  able,  in  1178,  to  return  in 
triumph  to  his  capital. 

BUT  THERE  IS  STILL  ANOTHER  REASON 

why  we  must  doubt  of  the  authority  of  this 
confirmatory  Bull.  The  researches  of 
Rev.  Mr.  Dimock  have  proved  what  Us- 
sher  long  ago  remarked,  that  this  Bull  of 
Alexander  originally  formed  part  of  the 
work  of  Giraldus  Cambrensis,  although 
later  copyists,  and  the  first  editors,  includ- 
ing the  learned  Camden,  recognizing  its 
spuriousness,  excluded  it  from  Giraldus' 
text.  The  matter  is  now  set  at  rest,  for 
the  ancient  MSS.  clearly  prove  that  it  orig- 
inally formed  part  of  the  Expugnatio  Hi- 
bcrnica.  Thanks,  however,  to  the  zeal 
nnd  industry  of  Mr.  Brewer,  we  are  at 

S resent  acquainted  with  another  work  of 
iraldus,  written  at  a  later  period  than 
His  Historical  Tracts  on  Ireland.    It  wen- 


titled  Dz  Pi-incipis  Instructions,  and  was 
edited  in  1 846  for  the  Anglia  Christiana 
Society.  Now.  in  this  treatise,  Giraldus 
refers  to  the  Bull  of  Alexander  III.,  of 
which  we  treat,  but  he  prefixes  the  follow- 
ing remarkable  words.  "Some  assert  or 
imagine  that  (his  Bull  was  obtained  from 
the  Pope;  but  others  deny  that  it  was  ever 
obtained  from  the  Pontiff.  "Sicut  a  qui- 
busdam  impetratum  aseeritur  am  confiu- 
gitur;  ab  alias  autem  unquam  impetratum 
tuisse  negatur."  Surely  these  words 
should  suffice  to  convince  the  most  skep- 
tical that  the  fact  of  the  Bull  of  Alexander 
being  recited  by  Giraldus  in  his  "Expug- 
natio Hihernica"  is  a  very  unsatisfactory 
ground  on  which  to  rest  the  argument  for 
its  genuineness. 

AS  REGARDS  THE  SYNOD  OF  WATERFORD 

in  1175,  and  the  statement  that  the  Bulls 
of  Adrian  and  Alexander  were  published 
therein  for  the  first  time,  all  these  matters 
rest  on  the  very  doubtful  authority  of  Gi- 
raldus Cambrensis.  We  have  no  record  in 
the  Irish  Annals  that  any  general  meet- 
ing of  the  Irish  Bishops  was  held  in 
Water  ford  in  1175.  The  circumstances  of 
the  country  rendered  such  a  Sjnod  impos- 
sible; for  war  and  dissensions  ranged 
throughout  the  length  and  breadth  of  our 
island.  It  was  in  that  year,  however,  that 
the  first  Bishop  was  appointed  by  King 
Henry  to  the  See  of  Waterford  as  Ware 
informs  us;  and,  perhaps,  we  would  not 
err  were  we  to  suppose  that  the  Synod  so 
pompously  set  forth  by  Giraldus  was  a  con- 
vention of  the  Anglo-Norman  clergy  of 
Waterford  under  their  newly  appointed 
Prelate,  all  of  whom  would,  no  doubt, 
joyfully  accept  the  official  documents  pre- 
sented in  the  name  of  the  King  by  Ni- 
cholas of  Wallingford. 

Leland  supposes  that  this  Svnod  of 
Waterford  was  not  held  till  1177.  "The  dis- 
turbed state  of  the  kingdom,  however,  ren- 
dered a  Synod  equally  impossible  in  that 
year,  and  all  our  ancient  authorities  ut- 
terly ignore  such  a  Synod. 

IN   THE  REMONSTRANCE  ADDRESSED 

by  the  Irish  princes  and  people  to  John 
XXII.,  about  the  year  1315,  repeated  men- 
tion is  made  of  the  Bull  of  Adrian.  But 
then  it  is  only  cited  there  as  a  conclusive 
argument  ad  hominen  against  the  En- 
glish traducers  of  our  nation,  "lest  the 
bitter  and  venomous  calumnies  of  the  En- 
glish, and  their  unjust  and  unfounded  at- 
tacks upon  us  and  all  who  support  our 
rights,  may  in  any  degree  influence  the 
mind  of  your  Holiness.''  The  Bull  of 
Adrian  IV.  was  published  by  the  English, 
and  set  forth  by  them  as  the  charier  deed 


THE      POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


33 


of  their  rule  in  Ireland;  yet  they  violated 
in  a  most  flagrant  manner  all  the  condi- 
tions of  that  Papal  grant.  The  Irish 
princes  and  people  in  self-defense  had  now 
made  over  the  sovereignly  of  the  island  to 
Edward  de  Bruce,  brother  of  the  Scottish 
King;  they  style  him  their  adopted  mon- 
arch, and  they  pray  the  Pope  to  give  a 
formal  sanction  to  their  proceedings. 
Thus,  throughout  the  whole  Remon- 
strance, the  Bull  of  Adrian  is  used  as  a  tell- 
ing argument  against  the  injustice  of  the 
invaders,  and  as  a  precedent  which  John 
XXII  might  justly  follow  in  sanctioning 
the  transfer  of  the  Irish  crown  to  Edward 
Bruce.  But  in  all  this  the  historian  will 
find  no  grounds  for  asserting  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  supposed  Bulls  of  Adrian  or 
Alexander.  We  will  just  now  see  that  at 
this  very  time  the  Irish  people  univers- 
ally regarded  these  Bulls  as  spurious  inven- 
tions of  their  English  enemies. 

Baronius,  the  eminent  ecclesiastical  his- 
torian, inserts  in  his  invaluable  Annals 
the  Bull  of  Adrian  IV.,  "from  a  Vatican 
Manuscript."  This  is  the  sixth  argument 
advanced  by  Mr.  O'Callaghan. 

IT  IS  NOT  MY  INTENTION  TO  QUESTION 

in  any  way  the  services  rendered  by  Car- 
dinal B  ironius  to  the  cause  of  our  Church 
history;  but  at  the  same  time  no  one  will 
deny  that  considerable  progress  has  been 
made  in  historical  research  during  the 
past  three  hundred  and  fifty  years,  and 
many  documents  are  now  set  aside  which 
were  then  accepted  ;is  unquestioned  on  the 
supposed  reliable  authority  of  preceding 
chroniclers. 

In  the  present  instance  we  are  not  left  in 
doubt  MS  to  the  source  whence  Baronius  de- 
rived his  informatian  regarding  Adrian's 
supposed  Bull.  Daring  my  stay  in  Rome 
I  took  occasion  to  inquire  whether  the 
MSS  of  the  eminent  annalist,  which  are 
happily  preserved,  indicated  the  special 
"Vatican  Manuscript"  referred  to  in  this 
text,  and  I  was  informed  by  the  learned 
archivist,  of  the  Vatican,  Monsignor 
Theiner,  who  is  at  present  engaged  in  giv- 
ing a  new  edition  and  continuing  the  great 
work  of  Baronius,  that  the  Codex  Vat- 
icanus  referred  to  is  a  MS.  copy  of  the 
history  of  Mathew  Paris,  which  is  pre- 
served in  the  Vatican  Library.  Thus  it  is 
the  testimony  of  Mathew  Paris  alone  that 
here  confronts  us  in  the  pages  of  Baronius 
and  no  new  argument  can  be  taken  from 
the  words  of  the  eminent  annalist.  Rely- 
ing on  the  same  high  authority,  I  am 
happy  to  state  that  nowhere  in  the  private 
archives  or  among  the  private  papers  of  the 
Vatican,  or  in  the  Regesta,  which  Jaffe's 
researches  have  made  so  famous,  or  in  the 
various  indices  of  the  Pontifical  Letters, 


can  a  single  trace  be  found  of  the  supposed 

Bulls  of  Adrian  IV.  and  Alexander  III. 

•  _____ 

THE  LAST  ARGUMENT  ADVANCED 

by  Mr.  O'Callaghan  will  not  detain  us 
long.  The  insertion  or  omission  of  such 
ancient  records  in  the  BuLlarium  is  a  mat- 
ter that  depends  wholly  on  the  critical  skill 
of  the  editor.  Curious  enough,  in  one  edi- 
tion of  the  Bullarium,  as  may  be  seen  in 
the  references  of  Dr.  Lanigan,  Adrian's 
Bull  is  inserted,  while  no  mention  is  made 
of  that  of  Alexander.  In  another  edition , 
however,  the  Bull  of  Alexander  is  given  in 
full,  while  the  Bull  of  Adrian  is  omitted. 
We  may  well  leave  our  opponents  to  settle 
this  matter  with  the  conflicting  editors  of 
the  Bullarium.  They  probably,  like 
Baronius,  merely  copied  the  Bull  of  Adrian 
from  Mathew  Paris,  and  erred  in  doing  so. 
Labbe,  in  his  magnificent  edition  of  the 
Councils,  also  publishes  Adrian's  Bull;  but 
then  he  expressly  tells  us  that  it  is  copied 
from  thr  work  of  Mathew  Paris. 


THE  IRISH  OPINION  OF  ADRIAN'S  BULL. 

We  have  thus,  as  far  as  the  limits  of  this 
article  will  allow,  examined  in  detail  the 
various  arguments  which  support  the  gen- 
uineness of  the  supposed  Bull;  and  now  it 
only  remains  for  us  to  conclude  that  there 
are  no  sufficient  grounds  for  accepting  that 
document  as  the  genuine  work  of  Pope 
Adrian. 

Indeed,  the  Irish  nation  at  all  times,  as 
if  instinctively,  shrunk  from  accepting'  it 
as  genuine,  and  unhesitatingly  pronounced 
it  an  Anglo-Norman  forgery.  We  have 
already  seen  how  even  Giraldus  Cambren- 
sis  refers  to  the  doubts  which  had  arisen  re- 
garding the  Bull  of  Pope  Alexander;  but 
we  have  at  hand  still  more  conclusive  evid- 
ence that  Adrian's  Bull  was  universally  re- 
jected by  our  people.  There  is,  happily 
preserved  in  the  Barberini  archives,Rome, 
a  MS.  of  the  fourteenth  century,  contain- 
ing a  series  of  official  papers 'connected 
with  the  Pontificate  of  John  XXIII.,  and 
among  them  is  a  letter  from  the  Lord  Jus- 
ticiary and  the  Royal  Seal,  and  presented 
to  His  Holiness  by  William  of  Nottingham, 
Canon  and  Precentor  of  St.  Patrick's  Cath- 
edral, Dublin,  about  the  year  1325.  In 
this  important,  but  hitherto  unnoticed  doc- 
ument, the  Irish  are  accused  of  very  many 
crimes,  among  which  is  insidiously  intro- 
duced the  rejection  of  supposed  Bulls: 
"Moreover,  they  assert  that  the  King  of 
England  under  false  pretences  and  by  false 
Bulls  obtained  the  dominion  of  Ireland, 
and  this  opinion  is  commonly  held  by 
them."  "Asserantes  etiam  Dominum 
Regem  Anglia  ex  falsa  suggestione  et  ex 
falsis  'Bullis  terram  Hibernie  in  dominium 
impetrosse  ac  communiter  hoc  tenentes." 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


This  national  tradition  was  preserved  un- 
broken throughout  the  turmoil  of  the  fif- 
teenth and  sixteenth  centuries,  and  on  the 
revival  of  our  historical  literature  in  the 
beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century  was 
registered  in  the  pages  of  Lynch,  Stephen 
White,  and  other  writers. 

It  will  be  well,  also,  while  forming  our 
judgment  regarding  the  supposed  Bull  of 
Adrian,  to  hold  in  mind  the  disturbed 
state  of  society,  especially  in  Italy,  at  the 
time  to  which  it  refers.  At  the  present  day 
it  would  be  no  easy  matter  indeed  for  such 
a  forgery  to  survive  more  than  a  few 
weeks.  But  at  the  close  of  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury it  was  far  otherwise.  Owing  to  the 
constant  revolutions  and  disturbances  that 
then  prevailed,  the  Pontiff  was  oftentimes 
obliged  to  fly  from  city  to  city;  and  fre- 
quently his  papers  were  seized  and  burned, 
and  he  himself  detained  as  a  hostage  or  a 
prisoner  by  his  enemies.  Hence  it  is  that 
several  forged  Bulls,  examples  of  which 
are  given  in  "Cambrensis  Eversis,"  date 
from  these  times.  More  than  one  of  the 
grants  made  to  the  Norman  families  are 
now  believed  to  rest  on  such  forgeries;  and 
that  the  Anglo-Norman  adventurers  in 
Ireland  were  not  strangers  to  such  deeds  of 
darkness,  appears  from  the  fact  that  a 
matrix  for  forgicg  the  Papal  Seal  of  such 
Bulls,  now  preserved  in  the  R.  I.  Academy, 
was  found  a  few  years  ago  in  the  ruins  of 
one  of  the  earliest  Anglo-Norman  monas- 
teries founded  by  De  Courcy. 

HOW  THE  BULL  WAS  PROMULGATED. 

The  circumstances  of  the  publication  of 
the  Bull  by  Henry  were  surely  not  cal- 
culated to  disarm  suspicion.  Our  oppon- 
ents do  not  even  pretend  that  it  was  made 
known  in  Ireland  till  the  year  1175,  and 
hence,  though  publicly  granted  with  sol- 
emn investiture,  as  John  of  Salisbury's 
testimony  would  imply,  and  though  its 
record  was  deposited  in  the  public  archives 
of  the  kingdom,  this  Bull,  so  vital  to  the 
interests  of  the  Irish  Church,  should  have 
remained  dormant,  for  twenty  years,  un- 
noticed in  Rome,  unnoticed  by  Henry's 
courtiers,  still  more,  unnoticed  by  the  Irish 
Bishops,  and  I  will  add,  unnoticed  by  the 
Continental  Sovereigns  so  jealous  of  the 
power  and  preponderance  of  the  English 
Monarch.  For  such  suppositions  there  is 
Indeed  no  parallel  in  the  whole  history  of 
investitures. 

It  is  seldom,  too,  that  the  hand  of  the 
imposture  may  not  be  detected  in  some  at 
least  of  the  minor  details  of  the  spurious 
document.  In  the  present  instance  more 
than  one  ancient  MS.  preserves  the  con- 
cluding formula  of  the  Bull:  "Datum 
Romae,"  dated  from  Rome.  Now,  this 
simple  formula  would  suffice  of  itself  to 


prove  the  whole  Bull  to  be  a  forgery. 
Before  the  news  of  the  election  of  Pope 
Adrian  to  the  Chair  of  St.  Peter  could 
reach  England,  that  Pontiff  was  obliged  to 
seek  for  safety  in  flight  from  his  capital. 
Rome  was  in  revolt,  and  Arnold  of  Brescia 
sought  to  renew  there  a  spectre  of  the  old 
Prtgan  Republic.  John  of  Salisbury,  in  his 
"Polycraticus"  faithfully  attests thf  ton  his 
arrival  in  Italy,  the  Papal  Court  was  held 
not  in  Rome  but  in  Beneventum;  it  was  in 
this  city  he  presented  to  Pope  Adrian  the 
congratulations  of  Henry  II.,  and  he  men- 
tions his  sojourn  there  during  the  three 
months  that  he  remained  in  Italy.  This  is 
further  confirmed  by  the  Italian  chronicles. 
Baronius  saw  the  inconsistency  of  the  for- 
mula, Datum  Romae,"with  the  date  1155, 
and  hence,  in  his  Annals,  he  entered 
Adrian's  Bull  under  the  year  1159;  but,  if 
this  date  be  correct,  surely  then  that  Bull 
dould  not  have  been  brought  to  Henry  by 
John  of  Salisbury,  and  the  passage  of  the 
"Metalogicus"  referring  to  it  must  at  once 
be  admitted  a  forgery.  Other  historians 
have  been  equally  puzzled  to  find  a  year 
for  this  supposed  Bull.  For  instance, 
O'Halloran  in  his  History  of  Ireland,  while 
admitting  that  the  Irish  people  always 
regarded  the  Bull  as  a  forgery,  refers  its 
date  to  the  year  1167,  that  is  eight  years 
after  the  death  of  Pope  Adrian  IV. 

A  CONCLUDING  REFLECTION. 

There  is  only  one  other  reflection  with 
which  I  wish  to  detain  the  reader. 
The  condition  of  our  country  and  the 
relations  between  Ireland  and  the  Eng- 
lish King,  which  are  set  forth  in  the  sup- 
posed Bull,  are  precisely  those  of  the  year 
1172;  but  it  would  have  required  more 
than  a  prophetic  vision  to  have  anticipated 
them  in  1155.  In  1155  Ireland  was  not  in 
a  state  of  turmoil  or  verging  toward  barba- 
rism; on  the  contrary,  it  was  rapidly 
progressing  and  renewing  its  claims  to 
religious  and  moral  pre-eminence.  I  will 
add,  that  Pope  Adrian,  who  had  studied 
under  Irish  masters,  knew  well  this  flour- 
ishing condition  of  our  country.  In  1172, 
however,  a  sad  change  had  come  over  our 
island.  Four  years  of  continual  warfare, 
and  the  ravages  of  the  Anglo-Norman  fili- 
busterers,  since  their  first  landing  in  1168, 
had  well  nigh  reduced  Ireland  to  a  state  of 
barbarism,  and  the  authentic  letters  of 
Alexander  III.,  in  1172  faithfully  describe 
its  most  deplorable  condition.  Moreover, 
an  expedition  of  Henry  to  Ireland,  which 
would  not  be  an  invasion,  and  yet  would 
merit  the  homage  of  the  Irish  Princes, 
was  simply  an  impossibility  in  1155.  But 
owing  to  the  special  circumstances  of  the 
Kingdom,  such  in  reality  was  the  expedi- 
tion of  Henry  in  1172.  He  set  out  for 


THE       POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


35 


Ireland,  not  avowedly  to  invade  and  con- 
quer it,  but  to  curb  the  insolence  and  to 
punish  the  deeds  of  pillage  of  his  own  Nor- 
man freebooters.  Hence  during  his  stay 
in  Ireland  he  fons;ht  no  battle  and  made 
no  conquest;  his  first  measures  of  severity 
were  directed  against  some  of  the  moat 
lawless  of  the  early  Norman  adventurers, 
and  this  more  than  anything  else  recon- 
ciled the  native  princes  to  his  military 


display.  In  return  he  received  from  a 
majority  of  the  Irish  chieftains  the  empty 
title  of  Ardrigh,  or  "Head  Sovereign." 
which  did  not  suppose  any  conquest  on 
his  part,  and  did  not  involve  any  surrender 
of  tneir  own  hereditary  rights.  Such  a 
state  of  things  could  not  have  been  imag- 
ined in  1155;  and  yet  it  is  one  which  is 
implied  in  the  spurious  Bull  of  the  much 
maligned  Pontiff,  Adrian  the  Fourth. 


CHAPTER      V. 

A  Historical  Contrast.— The  Characteis  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.  and  King  Henry  II.  Compared. 


Having  in  our  previous  chapters  thorough- 
ly diagnosed  the  disreputable  character  of 
Giraldus  Cambrensis,  whpse  literary  services 
King  Henry  II.  of  England  secured  in 
order  to  introduce  into  his  history  of  Ire- 
land the  forged  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian  IV., 
by  which  that  Pontiff  was  supposed  to  have 
granted  Ireland  to  Henry  Plantagenet,  it  ia 
now  in  order  to  introduce  historical  testi- 
mony which  will  forcibly  demonstrate  the 
fact  that  the  character  of  King  Henry  the 
Second  of  England  was  not  of  that  calibre 
which  would  entitle  him  to  receive  the 
confidence  of  any  Pontiff,  -much  less  to  have 
bestowed  upon  him  unlimited  authority  ever 
an  independent  people,  such  as  the  Irish 
were  up  to  the  time  of  the  English  invasion. 

In  order  that  our  readers  may  the  more 
readily  understand  this  important  historical 
question,  it  is  well  to  bear  in  mind  a  few 
important  facts  and  dates,  so  as  to  more 
clearly  understand  the  character  which 
King  Henry  II.  presented  to  both  the  Pope 
and  the  Irish  people  at  the  opening  of  the 
very  year  when  the  forged  Bull  of  Giraldus 
Cambrensis  was  first  brought  to  light. 

Nicholas  Breakspeare  was  elected  to  suc- 
ceed Pope  Eugenius  III.,  on  December  2nd, 
A.  D.,  1154,  and  took  the  name  of  Adrian 
IV.  By  birth  he  was  an  Englishman,  and 
—  as  a  notable  historian  truly  remarks — the 
extraordinary  circumstances  attending  his 
promotion  to  the  Pontifical  Chair  of  St. 
Peter  plainly  indicated  the  workings  of  the 


Almighty  Hand.  Almighty  God  called  this 
Servant  of  Servants  jfrom  the  lowest  rank 
of  human  society  to  the  most  supereminent 
position  man  can  occupy,  and  no  Catholic 
can  for  a  moment  harbor  the  thought  that 
Almighty  God  placed  Nicholas  Breakspeare 
in  the  Chair  of  St.  Peter  for  the  sole 
purpose  of  enslaving  the  Irish  people  by 
handing  them  over  to  the  brutality  of  a 
British  king. 


The  lives  of  all  the  Popes  have  less- 
ons in  them  for  every  Catholic,  hence,  in 
order  that  our  readers  may  have  an  intim- 
ate knowledge  of  the  genius  displayed  by 
this  much-maligned  Pontiff,  we  will  briefly 
sketch  his  life  and  his  labors,  so  that  every 
person  interested  in  knowing  the  truth  may 
conclude  at  once  that  Pope  Adrian  was  the 
last  man  in  the  world  who  would  be  guilty 
of  making  such  a  concession  to  Henry  II. 
of  England  as  to  best  >w  Ireland  upon  that 
monarch  in  order  to  purify  the  morals 
of  the  Irish  people,  and  for  the  propagation 
of  religion. 

The  father  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.  was  a 
servant  in  the  English  monastery  of  St. 
Alban's,  where  the  son  was  supported 
through  the  charity  of  the  Religious.  After 
a  few  years  of  penury  and  parental  cruelty, 
young  Nicholas  Breakspeare  wandered  off  to 
work  his  own  way  in  the  world,  and  after 
spending  some  time  in  England  he  crossed 
over  to  France,  where  he  enjoyed  for  a 


36 


THE       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


period  the  hospitality  of  the  monks  in  the 
monastery  of  St.  Hufus,  near  Aries.  He 
had  not  been  long  in  the  company  of  these 
Religious  until  they  discovered  in  his  char- 
acter a  religious  zeal,  a  remarkable  regularity 
of  lif«,  a  lofty  and  generous  disposition,  and 
an  amount  of  genius  and  superiority  which 
prompted  them  to  elect  him  Abbot. 
His  strictness  of  discipline,  however,  caused 
some  of  the  monks  to  complain  to  Pope 
Etigenius  III.,  and  when  that  holy  Pontiff 
heard  their  story  he  said  to  them  :  "  Go 
and  choose  an  Abbot  with  whom  you  may 
be  able,  or  rather  with  whom  you  are  will- 
ing to  live  in  peace  ;  your  present  Superior 
shall  not  long  be  a  burden  to  you  ;  I  ap- 
point him  Cardinal  of  Albano." 


From  these  two  circumstances  it  may 
easily  be  surmized  that  the  future  Pope 
Adrian  IV.  was  no  ordinary  man.  Honors 
sought  him,  and  not  he  them.  He  was  far 
from  being  the  sycophant  implied  by 
those  who  foolishly  assert  that  he  bestowed 
Ireland  upon  Henry  II.,  because  he  was  an 
Englishman;  and  his  future  course  in  the 
government  of  the  Church  proved  his  dig- 
nity and  sterling  justice  in  every  cause  that 
came  before  him. 

The  new  Cardinal  stood  sp  high  in  the 
estimation  of  Pope  Eugenius  III.,  that  he 
sent  him  as  Apostolic  Legate  to  the  north- 
ern Kingdoms  of  Denmark,  Sweden  and 
Norway.  In  each  of  these  lands  he  en- 
deared himself  to  the  people  through  his 
prudence,  piety,  eloquence,  and  gentleness 
of  disposition.  He  was  the  Apostle  of  Nor- 
way, and  the  bosom  friend  of  the  great  St. 
Eric,  or  Henry,  the  martyred  Bishop  of 
Upsal,  whose  feast  falls  on  January  19th. 
Thus  every  Catholic  can  readily  understand 
that  the  experience  whicli  Pope  Adrian  IV. 
gained  by  his  Apostolic  labors  among  the 
Danes,  Swedes  and  Norwegians,  as  well  as 
the  constant  intimacy  which  existed  be- 
tween him  and  the  saintly  Bishops  who 
were  then  planting  the  faith  among  these 
different  nations,  developed  in  him  those 
qualities  whicli  made  him  afterwards  illus- 
trious as  one  among  the  many  notable  Pon- 
tiffs that  occupied  the  Chair  of  St.  Peter. 

On  the  return  of  the  Cardinal  of  Albano 
to  Rome,  his  high  reputation  at  once  gained 


for  him  the  unanimous  vote  of  the  College 
of  Cardinals  as  the  successor  of  Pope  An- 
astasiiis  IV.,  then  recently  deceased.  But 
scarcely  had  Nicholas  Breakspeare  assumed 
the  title  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  ere  he  was 
called  upon  to  do  battle  against  royal  en- 
croachments upon  the  rights  of  the  Roman 
people.  And  yet,  unreflecting  writers  say 
that  the  same  Pontiff  permitted  and  author- 
ized the  royal  encroachment  of  Henry  II. 
of  England  upon  the  independent  Irish 
people. 


Arnald  of  Brescia  was  in  Rome,  develop- 
ing his  plans  for  the  revival  of  paganism, 
but  Adrian  IV.  was  equal  to  the  occasion, 
and  by  placing  Rome  under  Interdict 
circumvented  the  designs  of  the  enemy  of 
Christianity,  who  was  beheaded  in  1155. 

The  next    enemy    of    the    Church    over 
whom  Pope  Adrian  prevailed  was   William 
the  Bad,  who   succeeded   his  father  Roger 
on  the  throne  of  Sicily.     He  then  faced  no 
less  a  foeman  than   Frederick   Barbarossa 
whose  path  through  Lombardy  was  marked 
by    rivers  of  blood   and  by   mountains   of 
ruins.     Barbarossa    sought    to    make     the 
whole  world  a  single  Empire,  with— as  his- 
tory records  him  saying — "the   Sovereign 
Pontiff  as  its  spiritual  and  the  Emperor  as 
its  temporal  chief."     But  Pope  Adrian  IV. 
scorned  the  bribe.     He   determined   at  all 
hazards  to  defend  the  rights  of  the  people  of 
Lombardy  against  this  second   Attila,    and 
the  Pontiff  triumphed  over  the  persecutor 
in  the  end,  going  so  far  as  to  excommuni- 
cate the   Archbishop  of   Milan   for  falsely 
asserting  that  the  will  of  Frederick  Barbar- 
ossa was   "right,   justice  and  law."     The 
Pope  also  severely  censured  the  Bishops  of 
Lombardy  for  their  slavish  compliance  to 
every   demand   of    this    ambitious    tyrant. 
Here  again  we  may  well  ask  :     Was  such  a 
Pontiff  likely  to  act  in  opposition  to  all   his 
antecedents  by  quietly  enslaving  Ireland   to 
England  whilst  he  used  all  his  powerful  in- 
fluence to   prevent  the  people  of  Lombardy 
and  of  Italy  from  the  loss  of  their  freedom  ? 
Pope  Adrian  died  at  Anagni  on  Septem- 
ber 1st.  A.  D.,  1159,  leaving  behind  him  a 
brilliant  record,  unsullied  by  a  single  speck 
of  iniquity.     "  He  is  described  by  his  con- 
temporaries," says  Rev.  John  Miley,  in  his 


THE       POPE      AND       IUELAND. 


37 


"  History  of  the  Papal  States,"  "as  a  man 
full  of  kindliness  and  good  nature ;  mild, 
patient,  profound  :  versed  in  Greek  and 
Latin  literature  :  eloquent :  a  complete 
master  in  ecclesiastical  music  :  powerful  in 
handling  the  Word  of  God,  not  easily  ruf- 
fled, prone  to  forgive,  liberal  of  alms  and 
gifts,  and  altogether  a  most  amiable  and 
perfect  character." 


Now  let  us  place  in  contrast  with  Pope 
Adrian  IV.,  the  character  of  King  Henry 
II.  of  England,  so  that  we  may  discover,  if 
possible,  a  single  reason  why  Henry  Planta- 
genet  should  be  authorized  to  propagate 
what  is  styled  his  "glorious  renown,"  in 
the  bogus  Bull  published  in  Judge  Ma- 
guire's  pamphlet,  wherein  this  fictitious 
document  is  dated  as  "'  Given  at  Rome,  in 
tho  year  of  Salvation,  1156. 

The  first  pen-portrait  of  King  Henry  II. , 
whose  "glorious  renown"  Pope  Adrian  IV. 
is  falsely  accused  of  desiring  to  propagate, 
is  taken  from  an  address  delivered  at  Fort 
Wayne,  Indiana,  on  St.  Patrick's  Day, 
1881,  by  Hon.  Edmund  F.  Dunne,  LL.  D., 
ex-Chief  Justice  of  Arizona.  Speaking  of 
the  English  invaders  of  Ireland,  Judge 
Dunne  says : 

"  But  neither  was  it  from  the  Normans 
proper  that  the  troubles  of  Ireland  began. 
There  was  a  tribe  came  after  William  the 
Conqueror  worse  than  the  Normans,  the 
Angevins,  and  they  were  the  devils  incar- 
nate who  began  the  present  troubles  of  the 
Irish  people.  They  were  descended  from 
one  of  those  moral  monsters  with  which 
God  in  his  wrath  sometimes  afflicts  the 
world,  from  the  infamous  Fulc  the  Black, 
wife-murderer  of  Anjou.  Henry  II.  was 
his  representative  in  England.  This  was 
the  man  who  began  English  rule  in  Ireland. 
According  to  the  accounts  of  even  English 
historians,  he  was  a  devil  incarnate  if  there 
ever  was  such  a  thing  in  this  world,  and  his 
end  as  told  by  English  writers  was  so  fear- 
fully horrible,  not  from  physical  torture, 
for  no  man  touched  him,  so  fearfully  horri- 
ble I  say  that  I  would  not  dare  shock  you 
to-night  by  a  repetition  of  the  blasphemies 
which  preceded  it." 

A  nice  man  this  to  "  teach  the  Christian 
faith  to  the  ignorant  and  rude  Irish,"  and 
to  extirpate  the  roots  of  vice  "from  the  field 
of  the  Lord,"  as  the  fictitious  Bull  makes 
Pope  Adrian  TV.  say  to  "His  dearest  Son 
in  Christ,  the  Illustrious  King  of  England  !" 


"  You  have  heard  of  a  King  of  England 
who,  enraged  because  he  could  not  chastise 
the  people  of  Wales  as  he  wished,  turned 
upon  the  hostages  he  held,  the  sons  and 
daughters  of  the  noblest  families  of  Wales 
and  rooted  out  the  eyes  of  the  youths  and 
amputated  the  ears  and  noses  of  the  daugh- 
ters. This  was  the  king  who  did  it." 

Yet  the  bogus  Bull  tells  us  that  this  same 
inhuman  monster  was  authorized  to  "  ex- 
tend the  borders  of  the  Church"  in  Ireland  ! 
He  was  also  deputed  by  the  Pope  to  "re- 
strain the  progress  of  vice,"  to  increase 
religion  and  to  do  all  things  whichsoever 
pertained  to  the  honor  of  God! 

"You  have  heard  of  St.  Thomas  A'Beck- 
ett,  who  was  murdered  in  the  house  of  God 
while  participating  in  the  vesper  chant ; 
stricken  down  within  the  chancel,  his  brains 
dug  out  with  a  sword  and  smeared  upon  the 
altar.  This  King  Henry  was  the  instigator 
of  the  murder." 

What  a  charming  character  to  send  into 
Ireland  as  a  Christian  Apostle  !  The  king's 
mission,  according  to  the  fraudulent  Bull  of 
Pope  Alexander  III.  was  to  reform  the  bar- 
barous Irish  people  who  were  "  Christians 
only  in  name  !" 

"  There  were  four  sons  of  a  King  of  Eng- 
land once.  One  of  them,  afterwards  Rich- 
ard I.  of  England,  said  :  '  The  custom  of 
our  family  is  that  the  son  shall  hate  the 
.father ;  our  destiny  is  to  detest  each  other. 
This  is  our  heritage  which  we  shall  never 
renounce.  From  the  devil  we  came  ;  to  the 
devil  we  will  return."  These  were  the  sons 
of  this  King  Henry." 

A  bad  tree  produces  bad  fruit,  and  King 
Henry's  genealogical  tree  may  be  well  called 
the  Upas  tree  whose  deadly  odors  poia- 
oned  the  atmosphere  surrounding  it. 

"  There  was  a  King  of  England  once  who 
said  :  '  Accursed  be  the  day  on  which  I 
was  born,  and  accursed  of  God  be  the  chil- 
dren I  leave  behind  me.'  That  was  also 
this  same  King  Henry." 

No  doubt  when  Henry  Plantagenet  drew 
down  this  malediction  upon  the  heads  of 
himself  and  his  offspring,  he  had  in  mind 
the  bogus  Bull  which  he  had  forged  and  which 
worked  such  iniquity  upon  the  independent 
Catholics  of  Ireland. 

"But  there  was  another  malediction  he 
uttered  before  his  death,  more  fearful  than 
any  of  these.  A  malediction  which  I  dare 
not  repeat  to  you.  I  will  not  say  go  to  the 
histories  and  find  it.  You  can  find  it  if  you 


38 


THE       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


look  for  it,  but  you  cannot  read  it  without 
horror,  nor  afterwards  think  of  it  without 
terror.  The  rule  of  these  Angevin  devils 
lasted  about  300  years.  This  Henry  II. 
was  the  first  of  the  brood ;  the  crooked- 
back  tyrant,  Richard  III.,  was  the  last. 
1  have  said  that  England  had  men  of  genius 
to  foresee,  and  iron  hearts  to  execute. 
These  were  some  of  them,  and  all  English 
rulers  of  Ireland  since,  in  everything  relat- 
ing to  Ireland,  seem  to  have  inherited  their 
cruelty  of  character,  determining  every  Irish 
question  not  upon  any  principle  of  natural 
justice  but  solely  upon  the  cold-blooded 
policy  of  how  most  to  injure  Ireland  and 
prevent  her  in  any  way  rivalling  England. 
Do  my  American  friends  smile  a  little  at 
this,  thinking  it  a  Celtic  exaggeration  I  Ah  ! 
if  they  do.  it  only  proves  how  necessary  it  is 
for  us  to  show  them  what  enormities  have 
been  perpetrated  upon  the  Irish  people, 
under  the  forms  of  English  law.  Did  you 
ever  hear  of  the  Penal  Laws  in  force  in  Ire- 
land down  to  a  late  day  I  King  Henry  was 
not  more  enraged  by  Welsh  resistance  than 
his  successors  were  by  Irish  obstruction. 
King  Henry  was  not  more  cruel  to  his 
Welsh  hostages  than  his  successors  were  to 
their  Irish  subjects.  They  forbade  to  the 
Irish  people  all  liberty  of  religion;  forbade 
them  to  speak  the  Irish  language,  to  have 
Irish  books,  or  to  instruct  Irish  children.  It 
was  declared  by  these  laws  that  the  life  of  an 
Irishman,  or  the  honor  of  nn  Irishwoman 
might  be  taken  at  will,  anywhere  outside  the 
pale,  that  is,  anywhere  over  fifty  miles  from 
Dublin;  and  to  mark  their  hatred  of  the 
Irish  rrfce,  they  enacted  that  if  an  English- 
man dared  to  marry  an  Irishwoman,  he  was 
to  be  half  hanged,  his  heart  cut  out  before 
he  was  dead,  his  head  struck  off  and  his 
lands  forfeited  to  the  crown.  Do  you  ask 
whether  these  laws  had  not  been  left  simply 
a  dead  letter  on  the  Statute  book  ?  Many 
of  them  were  not  only  in  force  but  enforced 
down  to  1829. 

This  Henry  IF.  was  the  first  English  king 
who  claimed  to  govern  Ireland,  and  he  did 
it  on  the  pretence  of  wishing  to  improve  the 
morals  of  the  people.  He  knew  that  the 
deepest,  strongest  love  which  the  Irish  peo- 
ple had,  was  for  their  old  Catholic  faith,  and 
that  they  had  unmeasured  respect,  love  and 
affection  for  the  Holy  Father,  visible  head 
of  their  Church.  Now,  how  do  you  suppose 
he  applied  that  knowledge  ?  He  forged  a 
Butt,  as  coming  from  the  Pope,  giving  to  him 
the  sovereignty  of  Ireland,  and  calling  upon 
the  people  of  Ireland  to  render  him  allegiance. 

Thus  the  very  beginning  of  English  rule 
in  Ireland  was  built  on  a  foundation  of  fraud, 
and  ever  since,  it  has  been  continued  by 
fraud,  treachery,  robbery,  rapine,  murder, 
slaughter  and  every  other  crime  known  in 
the  calendar." 


It  will  be  noticed  in  one  of  the  para- 
graphs of  the  foregoing  extract,  that  Judge 
Dunne  alludes  to  the  inhumanity  of  King 
Henry  the  Second  toward  the  children  of 
his  Welsh  hostages.  Lingard  makes  this 
blood-red  record  of  that  horrible  barbarity  : 

"  Henry  II.,  in  his  excursion  into  Wales 
in  1164,  1  uiving  received  as  hostages  the 
children  of  the  noblest  families  of  that 
country,  gave  orders  that  the  eyes  of  all  tho 
males  should  be  rooted  out,  and  the  eara 
and  noses  of  the  females  should  be  amputa- 
ted." 

It  is  also  reported  of  this  brutal  kin"  thst 
on  one  occasion  his  anger  became  so  fierce 
that  he  actually  became  crazy.  The  occa- 
sion arose  as  follows  :  "  The  king  being  at 
Caen,  he  was  provoked  against  Richard  de 
Harnet,  because  he  said  something  in  de- 
fence of  the  king  of  Scotland.  Breaking 
out  into  a  rage  of  passion,  king  Henry 
called  him  a  traitor,  and  thereupon,  begin- 
ning to  be  inflamed  with  his  wonted  fury, 
he  flung  his  cap  fr.nn  his  head,  ungirted 
his  belt,  hurled  away  his  cloak  and  gar- 
ments wherewith  he  was  apparelled,  cast 
off  with  his  own  hands  a  coverlet  of  silk 
from  his  bed,  and  sitting  as  it  were  upon  a 
dunghill  of  straw,  began  to  chew  the  straws 
in  order  to  glut  his  demoniacal  rage  !" 

On  another  occasion  a  page  carried  a  let- 
ter to  King  Henry  H.,  the  contents  of 
which  were  not  pleasing  to  his  Majesty,  so, 
in  order  to  give  vent  to  his  vengeance,  he 
grasped  the  unfortunate  messenger  by  the 
throat  and  attempted  to  pluck  out  his  eyes 
with  his  royal  fingers  ! 

A  man  infuriated  with  such  diabolical 
passion  and  such  brutal  propensities,  was  not 
exactly  the  kind  of  ruler  Pope  Adrian  IV. 
would  place  over  the  Irish  people  or  address 
as  a  monarch  of  "  glorious  renown." 


Now  let  us  turn  to  the  treatment  which 
St.  Thomas  A'Becket,  Bishop  and  Martyr, 
received  at  the  hands  of  this  monarch  who 
was  the  first  accessory  to  the  Archbishop's 
murder.  King  Henry  II.  ascended  the 
English  throne  on  the  20th  of  December, 
A.  D.,  1154,  and  three  years  later  he  ele- 
vated the  distinguished  divine  whose  murder 
he  subsequently  suggested,  to  the  high 
position  of  Lord  Chancellor  of  England. 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


39 


From  the  first  day  he  entered  upon  the 
duties  of  his  oflice,  until  he  resigned  it 
into  the  king's  hands,  St.  Thomas  was  con- 
stantly annoyed  by  the  petty  tyranny  and 
the  usurpation  by  the  king  of  ecclesiastical 
authority  over  even  the  Catholic  Prelates. 
At  length  King  Henry  determined  to  per- 
secute St.  Thomas  to  death  if  possible.  Ac- 
cordingly, Henry  called  a  Council  of  the 
Bishops  and  nobility  at  Northampton,  on 
October  8th,  1164,  during  which  he  pro- 
nounced sentence  of  exile  against  the  saintly 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  declared 
all  his  goods  confiscated  to  the  Crown.  St. 
Thomas  fled  to  France,  where  he  had  an 
audience  with  the  Pope,  to  whom  he  re- 
lated all  the  trouble  which  Henry  II.  had 
caused  the  Church  in  England. 

In  the  meantime  the  English  monarch 
was  greatly  incensed  against  both  the  Pope 
and  the  Archbishop,  because  the  latter  had 
escaped  his  wrath  and  the  former  had  com- 
mended him  for  his  course.  In  order  to  grati- 
fy his  passion,  therefore,  Henry  confiscated 
not  only  the  goods  of  the  innocent  Arch- 
bishop, but  he  actually  seized  upon  all  the 
property  belonging  to  all  the  friends,  rela- 
tives and  domestics  even  of  Saint  Thomas, 
banished  them  from  his  dominions,  not 
sparing  even  year-  old  infants  or  tottering 
age  !  Then  he  compelled  them  by  oath  to 
proceed  in  a  body  to  the  place  where  the 
Archbishop  was  residing  at  Pontigny,  in  a 
monastery  of  the  Cisterian  Order,  so  that 
he  might  be  compelled  to  shed  tears  of  sor- 
row at  the  sight  of  so  much  helpless  poverty 
and  undeserved  destitution  !  Not  satisfied 
with  these  acts  of  inhuman  tyranny,  the 
brutal  butcher  of  the  Welsh  Innocents,  act- 
ually wrote  to  the  Cistercian  monks  that  he 
would  close  up  and  confiscate  every  Cister- 
cian monastery  in  England  unless  the 
monks  of  Pontigny  turned  St.  Thomas  out 
of  their  house  ! 

The  Pope  and  some  of  the  Princes  of 
Europe  tried  to  bring  Henry  II.  to  effect  a 
reconciliation  with  St.  Thomas,  but  the 
Plantagenet  persecutor  went  so  far  as  to 
threaten  the  Holy  Father  with  his  direful 
vengeance  if  he  dared  again  to  address  him 
on  the  subject ! 

The  saintly  Archbishop  not  desiring  to 
bring  down  the  King's  ungovernable  wrath 


upon  the  innocent  members  of  the  Cister- 
cian Order,  left  their  hospitable  roof,  and 
proceeded  to  Sens,  where  the  King  of  France 
provided  him  with  the  few  necessaries  of 
life  required  by  this  living  martyr  of  a  bru- 
tal monarch's  vengeance.  From  the  mon- 
astery of  St.  Columba,  adjacent  to  Sens, 
the  exiled  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  sent 
Pastoral  Letters  over  to  England,  excom- 
municating all  those  who  should  obey  the 
late  orders  of  the  King  of  England  in  seiz- 
ing the  estates  of  the  Church,  and  exhorting 
that  monarch  to  repentance.  In  the  mean- 
time King  Henry  sent  some  of  his  deputies 
to  Rome  in  order  to  influence  the  Cardinals 
against  St.  Thomas.  But  his  secret  diplom- 
acy availed  him  nothing  in  the  end,  as 
Cardinal  Otto,  one  of  the  two  Legates  ap- 
pointed by  the  Pope,  wrote  to  Henry  that 
he  must  return  the  ill-gotten  property  he 
had  gained  by  unjust  confiscation. 

The  King  of  France  then  undertook  to  act 
as  arbitrator  between  Henry  and  the  s»intly 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  but  the  audi- 
ences subsequently  held  availed  nothing. 
The  Pope  then  sent  two  new  Legates — 
Gratian  and  Vivian — to  the  turbulent  King, 
and,  after  them,  two  more,  but  the  surly 
monarch  would  not  accede  to  their  terms  of 
required  restitution.  As  adding  insult  to  in- 
jury, Henry  caused  his  son  to  be  crowned 
King  by  the  Archbishop  of  York,  in  the 
very  Diocese  of  Canterbury  from  which  St. 
Thomas  a'Becket  had  been  expatriated.  The 
cruel  monarch  moreover,  obliged  his  subjects, 
even  by  inhuman  torments,  to  renounce 
their  obedience  not  only  to  the  Archbishop 
but  also  to  the  Pope  ! 

At  lenght  a  reconciliation  was  brought 
about  by  the  Archbishop  of  Sens,  but  it  was 
of  the  nature  of  a  reconciliation  which  a 
wolf  might  make  with  a  lamb  in  order  to 
satiate  its  craving  for  flesh  and  blood.  King 
Henry,  finding  that  he  could  not  wreak  his 
vengeance  with  sufficient  severity  upon  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  so  long  as  he  re- 
mained in  France,  patched  up  a  peace  in  or- 
der to  get  the  innocent  victim  of  his  terrible 
wrath  into  the  kingdom  where  his  death 
would  pay  the  penalty  of  the  blood-thirsty 
monarch.  Archbishop  Becket — who  well 
knew  there  were  no  bounds  to  King  Henry's 
— had  a  premonition  that  the  English 


40 


TIIK       1'01'K       AND       IRKLAND. 


king  meant  him  greviuua  bodily  harm,  as  he 
said  to  the  French  King  when  taking  leave 
of  him  :  "I  am  going  to  seek  my  death  in 
England."  The  monarch  answered :  "So 
I  believe,"  and  pressed  St.  Thomas  to  stay 
in  his  kingdom  where  he  could  live  in  peace 
and  religious  happiness,  but  the  innocent 
victim  of  King  Henry's  wrath  answered  with 
true  Christian  resignation  :  "The  will  of  God 
'  must  be  accomplished. '' 

St.  Thomas  proceeded  to  England,  where 
he  landed  in  safety,  but  during  his  journey 
into  the  interior  he  miraculously  escaped 
ambuscades  set  for  him  by  assassins  hired 
no  doubt  by  Henry  to  murder  him.  This  is 
evident  from  the  fact  that  when,  a  few  weeks 
afterwards,  a  deputation  of  dissatisfied  Pre- 
lates arrived  in  Normandy  to  have  an  inter- 
view with  King  Henry,  in  order  to  inform 
him  that  St.  Thomas  would  not  remove  the 
Censures  which  were  promulgated  against 
them  in  consequence  of  their  quiet  acqui- 
escence with  King  Henry's  robbery  of  the 
temporalities  of  the  See  of  Canterbury,  the 
wrathful  monarch  cried  out  in  a  voice 
quivering  with  demoniacal  passion,  that 
"He  cursed  all  those  whom  he  had  honored 
with  his  friendship,  and  enriched  by  his 
bounty,  seeing  that  none  of  them  had  the 
courage  to  rid  him  of  out  Bishop,  who  gave 
him  more  trouble  than  all  the  rest  of  his 
subjects." 

These  words  at  once  suggested  to  several 
of  his  courtiers  who  surrounded  him,  the 
propriety  of  murdering  St.  Thomas,  in  order 
to  please  the  detestable  tyrant.  According- 
ly on  Christmas  Day,  when  St.  Thomas  came 
to  preach,  he  took  for  his  text :  '  'Peace  to 
men  of  good-will  on  earth,"  telling  his  flock 
that  it  was  his  last  discourse,  as  he  should 
shortly  leave  them.  In  the  meantime  five 
assassins  and  a  troop  of  armed  men  were 
approaching  Canterbury  Cathedral,  which 
they  reached'  next  day.  It  was  the  Vesper 
hour,  and  the  Archbishop  was  in  the  sacred 
edifice  when  the  murderers  entered  with 
drawn  swords.  One  of  the  ruflians  advanced 
towards  the  venerable  Prelate  exclaiming  : 


"Now  you  must  die !"  The  Archbishop 
calmly  answered  :  "I  am  ready  to  die  for 
God,  for  justice,  and  for  the  liberty  of  His 
Church.  *  *  *  I  have  defended  the 
Church  as  far  as  I  was  able  during  my  life, 
when  I  saw  it  oppressed,  and  I  shall  be 
happy  if  by  my  death  at  least  I  can  restore  its 
peace  and  liberty."  He  then  slowly  sank  to 
the  ground  on  his  knees  and  spoke  these  his 
last  words  :  "I  recommend  my  soul  and  the 
cause  of  the  Church  to  God,  to  the  Blessed 
Virgin,  to  the  holy  patrons  of  this  place,  to 
the  martyrs  St.  Dionysius  and  St.  Elphege 
of  Canterbury.''  The  saintly  Prelate,  with 
the  true  courage  of  a  Christian  martyr,  then 
prayed  for  his  murderers  and  placed  his  head 
so  they  could  strike  it  with  their  swords. 
The  hirelings  of  King  Henry  desired  to  re- 
move him  from  the  Cathedral,  but  he 
courageously  exclaimed  :  *'I  will  not  stir  ; 
do  here  what  you  please,  or  are  commanded." 
The  assassins  then  fell  upon  him,  hacking 
his  head  and  scattering  his  brains  upon  the 
consecrated  floor  of  the  Cathedral.  When 
fienry's  minions  had  thus  accomplished  their 
master's  will,  they  proceeded  to  the  martyred 
Archbishop's  residence  which  they  rifled  of 
all  its  valuables  as  their  booty  for  the  bloody 
deed  they  had  performed.  This  horrible 
murder  occurred  on  the  29th  of  December, 
1170. 

In  justice  to  the  murderers  of  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  and  the  monarch  who 
suggested  the  horrible  butchery,  it  is  proper 
to  state  that,  with  one  exception,  they 
all  repented  their  fearful  crime,  but  the  fact 
still  remains  that  it  was  at  the  suggestion  of 
•King  Henry  II.  of  England,  the  martyred 
Archbishop  was  ruthlessly  slaughtered,  and 
it  requires  no  great  stretch  of  the  imagination 
to  conclude  that  a  ruler  who  would  suggest 
the  murder  of  a  saintly  Archbishop,  merely 
because  he  defended  the  Church  against  the 
King's  injustice,  would  not  hesitate  to  cause 
a  forged  Bull  to  be  manufactured  in  order  to 
fortify  injustice  towards  the  Irish  people  by 
perpetrating  a  fraud  against  Rome. 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


41 


CHAPTER      VI. 

The  Bull  of  Adrian  Tested. — Analysis  of  the  Pontificate  of  Alexander  III.-  More  of 
Judge  Maguire's  Mistakes. — Pope  Adrian's  Bull  Viewed  from  a  Critical  Stand- 
point. 


The  three  principal  characters  that  figure 
most  prominently  in  the  historical  question: 
"Did  Pope  Adrian  IV.  bestow  Ireland 
upon  King  Henry  II.  of  England  ?"  are, 
the  Pontiff  who  is  supposed  to  have  made, 
the  grant,  the  King  who  is  said  to  have  re- 
ceived it,  and  Pope  Alexander  III.,  the 
Pontiff  who  is  reported  to  have  confirmed  it. 
Already  we  have  made  a  sufficient  analysis 
of  the  characters  of  Pope  Adrian  and  King 
Henry  to  satisfy  any  reasonable  mind  that 
the  former  never  made  the  grant  and  that 
the  latter  never  received  it.  Now  let  us 
make  an  analysis  of  the  character  and 
policy  of  Pope  Alexander  III.,  and  ascer- 
tain whether  a  single  action  of  his  whole 
Pontificate  points  him  out  as  a  spiritual  ruler 
likely  to  use  the  uncharitable  and  untruth- 
ful language  in  which  the  Bull  attributed 
to  him  is  couched.  All  men,  whether 
Popes,  Presidents,  or  private  individuals, 
are  to  be  judged  by  their  works,  and  not 
by  a  single  act  attributed  to  them  by  parties 
deeply  interested  in  sustaining  their  own 
iniquitous  proceedings,  and  which  stands 
in  direct  opposition  to  all  their  other  official 
proceedings. 


The  Pontificate  of  Pope  Alexander  III. 
commenced  September  7th,  A.  D.,  1159,  and 
ended  August  30th,  1181.  The  bogus  Bull, 
printed  in  Judge  Maguire's  bad  book,  bears 
date  thus  :  "Given  at  Rome,  in  the  year  of 
Salvation,  1172,"  although  the  Pope  was 
not  in  Rome  at  that  time.  The  absence  of 
day  or  month  from  the  document  is  also 
another  fatal  omission  which  goes  far  to 
prove  the  aforesaid  document  a  clumsy 
forgery.  These  facts,  however,  we  will  de- 
velop in  their  proper  place,  and  we  will  now 
proceed  at  once  to  give  a  sketch  of  the 
character  which  Pope  Alexander  sustained 
throughout  his  occupancy  of  the  Chair  of 
St.  Peter,  and  offer  irrefutable  proof  show- 
ing that  he  loved  popular  freedom  far  too 
dearly  to  permit  himself  to  be  a  party  to 


such  enslavement  of  a  whole  independent 
nation  as  that  contemplated  by  King  Henry 
II. 


Pope  Alexander  III.  was  the  emancipator 
of  the  slaves  in  the  middle  ages.  In  a 
Council  held  in  the  twelfth  century,  this 
great  Pontiff  abolished,  as  far  as  lay  in  his 
power,  the  curse  of  slavery  throughout  the 
world.  His  prudence,  wisdom  and  justice 
gave  him  a  great  victory  over  Frederick 
Barbarossa.  He  it  was  who — as  a  French 
historian  says — "restored  the  rights  of  na- 
tions and  curbed  the  passions  of  kings." 
Voltaire  says  of  him:"  "If  men  have  re- 
covered their  rights,  it  is  chiefly  to  Pope 
Alexander  that  they  are  indebted  for  them  ; 
to  him  so  many  cities  owe  their  new  or  re- 
covered splendor."  This  is  a  grand  eulogy 
coming  from  such  an  enemy  of  the  Church 
as  Voltaire,  but  Pope  Alexander  well  de- 
served such  praise  for  the  fortitude  and 
prudence  which  he  constantly  manifested 
during  his  twenty  years  exile  from  Borne, 
in  the  midst  of  threatened  schism,  persecu- 
tion, and  a  constant  struggle  against  the 
armed  hosts  of  the  ambitious  Barbarossa, 
who  desired  to  bring  the  whole  world  under 
his  regal  sway. 


Alexander  III.  had  scarcely  received  the 
news  of  his  election  to  the  Pontifical  throne 
ere  he  had  to  quit  Rome  and  hurry  to  the 
monastery  of  Santa  Nympha,  where  he  was 
consecrated,  whilst  the  anti-Pope  Victor 
III.  reigned  in  Rome.  The  Emperor  Fred- 
erick favored  Victor,  and  a  number  of  the 
Cardinals  did  the  anti-Pope  homage,  but 
Alexander  faced  the  fierce  storm  with  cheeks 
unblanched  with  fear,  and  when  deputies 
were  sent  by  Barbarossa  to  call  the  true 
Vicar  of  Christ  before  a  council  which 
Frederick  had  called  to  meet  at  Pavia, 
Alexander  replied  to  the  request  in  these 
courageous  terms :  ' '  We  recognize  in  the 
Emperor,"  said  the  exiled  Pontiff,  "the 


42 


THE       POPE      AND      1UELAND. 


armed  defender  of  the  Roman  Church,  but 
never  shall  the  prerogative  given  by  JKSCS 
CHRIST  to  St.  Peter  be  violated  in  our  per- 
son. The  Roman  Church  judges  all  others, 
and  is  subject  to  the  judgment  of  none. 
We  are  prepared  to  give  our  life  in  defence 
of  her  rights." 

Notwithstanding  the  Pope's  declaration, 
the  council  met  and  the  anti-Pope  Victor 
was  placed  upon  the  Pontifical  throne  by 
the  Emperor  Barbarossa,  who  proclaimed 
that  all  Bishops  should  obey  the  authority 
of  Victor  on  pain  of  perpetual  banishment. 
The  true  Pope  replied  by  solemnly  excom- 
municating Frederick,  together  with  the 
anti-Pope  and  all  his  partisans,  both  lay  and 
clerical. 

This  was  the  first  act  in  a  drama  which 
lasted  for  many  years,  and  which  engaged 
the  attention  of  the  whole  of  Europe,  array- 
ing against  the  patient  Alexander  III.  the 
bitter  animosity  of  a  world  conquering  ty- 
rant who  has  been  well-named  "the  modern 
Attila."  The  ancient  and  beautiful  city  of 
Milan  was  reduced  to  a  heap  of  shapeless 
ruins,  because  the  inhabitants  recognized 
Alexander  as  the  true  Pope.  Other  cities 
did  likewise,  until  Alexander  III.  became 
the  head  and  the  leader  about  whose  sacred 
person  all  the  Italian  cities  rallied  when 
they  saw  their  independence  threatened  by 
the  despotic  ambition  of  the  German  Em- 
peror, Frederick  Barbarossa. 


In  order  to  get  beyond  the  reach  of  the 
would-be  Emperor  of  the  world,  Pope  Alex- 
ander III.  retired  in  1163  to  France,  where 
he  heard  of  the  death  of  the  anti-Pope 
Victor,  and  also  of  the  election  of  the  anti- 
Pope  Paschal  III.  through  the  influence  of 
Barbarossa.  Yet  the  undismayed  Vicar  of 
Christ  was  determined  to  die  in  exile  if 
necessary,  sooner  than  submit  to  the  en- 
slavement of  a  single  people  to  the  sway  of 
the  tyrant  who  persecuted  the  Church  in 
the  person  of  its  Pontiff.  And  thus  it  came 
about  that  at  last  the  warlike  Barbarossa 
yielded  to  the  exalted  ecclesiastic  whose 
only  weapon  was  his  crozier  and  whose  only 
shield  was  the  Cross.  The  Vicar  of  Christ 
was  called  back  to  Italy,  and  as  the  exiled 
Pontiff  aaw  himself  surrounded  in  Venice 


by  the  Prelates  of  the  Church  and  the  rep- 
resentatives of  the  Emperor  who  sought 
pence  at  his  hands,  he  must  have  felt  that 
his  triumph  came  from  God.  "  Well- 
beloved  sons,"  said  Alexander,  "  it  is  a 
miracle  of  God's  power,  that  an  aged  ami 
unarmed  priest  should  have  resisted  the 
rage  of  the  most  powerful  king  on  earth  ; 
by  this  let  all  men  know  that  it  is  impossi- 
ble to  war  against  the  Lord  and  against  His 
Christ." 

Such  was  the  courageous  hero  of  liberty 
whom  Catholics  are  asked  to  believe  helped 
to  hand  over  the  independent  Irish  people, 
bound  hand  and  foot,  to  Henry  II  of  Eng- 
land, in  order  to  confer  upon  the  English 
monarch  the  Apostolic  power  of  "teaching 
the  truth  of  the  Christian  faith"  to  »  people 
who  had  about  thirty  Archbishops  and 
Bishops,  as  well  as  hundreds  of  secular 
priests  and  members  of  Religious  Or- 
ders !  Is  there  any  sensible  Catholic  in 
America  who  would  harbor  such  an  idea  for 
a  moment  ?  What  ?  A  Vicar  of  Christ  to 
ignore  the  Bishops  and  priests  of  a  country, 
and  to  confer  Episcopal  powers  on  an  alien 
layman  ?  Such  an  outrage  never  was  perpe- 
trated by  any  Pontiff  that  ever  sat  in  the 
Chair  of  St.  Peter. 


It  is  true  that  Henry  did  penance  and 
was  forgiven  for  the  part  he  acted  in  the 
horrible  butchery  of  St.  Thomas  A'Becket, 
but  it  by  no  means  follows  that  Pope  Alex- 
ander would  make  such  a  rebellious,  im- 
moral and  ruffianly  character  as  he  knew 
King  Henry  to  be,  the  second  Apostle  of 
Ireland  to  "  propagate  the  righteous  planta- 
tion of  faith"  in  an  island  whose  fame  for 
sanctity  was  known  all  over  the  world 
through  the  numerous  saints  it  had  sent  to 
convert  the  nations  of  Europe  !  The  Bull 
was  made  by  King  Henry's  order,  and  Pope 
Alexander  never  saw  it ! 

Another  feature  in  the  character  of  Popo 
Alexander  III  ,  which  goes  very  far  towards 
proving  that  he  never  signed  the  Bull  at- 
tributed to  him,  is  the  fact  that  he  kncic 
King  Henry  to  be  a  bad  man  and  the  pro- 
moter of  the  murder  of  St.  Thomas  A' Becket, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury . 

In  order  to  escape  from  the  fury  of  the 
ferocious  King  of  England  it  became  neces- 


THE       POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


43 


sary  for  St.  Thomas  A'Becket  to  fly  to 
France  in  1164,  in  order  to  lay  before  Alex- 
ander III.  the  injustice,  robbery  and  sacri- 
lege done  by  a  monarch  who  became 
a  perfect  demon  in  his  passion,  presenting, 
as  Lingard  says,  "the  raving  of  a  mad  man 
with  the  fury  of  a  savage  beast.  In  his 
paroxysms  his  eyes  were  spotted  with 
blood,  his  countenance  seemed  to  flame,  his 
tongue  poured  forth  a  torrent  of  abuse  and 
imprecation,  and  his  hands  were  employed 
to  inflict  vengeance  on  what  ever  came 
within  his  reach." 


Pope  Alexander  received  the  exiled  vic- 
tim of  Henry's  hatred  with  open  arms.  He 
directed  the  Archbishop  to  promulgate  a 
Bull  of  excommunication  against  Henry  II., 
and  against  all  who  abetted  his  tyranny  and 
his  thievery.  The  Letters  containing  these 
Pontifical  censures  had  to  be  secretly  con- 
veyed into  England  by  some  monks,  in  con- 
sequence of  the  caution  used  by  Henry, 
who  determined  to  prevent  the  Pope  from 
laying  an  Interdict*  upon  his  kingdom.  In 
order  also  to  accomplish  his  antagonism  to 
both  Pope  and  Prelate,  the  King  caused 
these  hu*nane  regulations  to  be  published 
along  the  whole  English  coast:  "If  any 
Religious  attempt  to  bring  Pontifical  Letters 
into  England,  he  shall  lose  his  feet ;  if  a 
cleric,  he  shall  lose  his  eyes  ;  if  a  layman  he 
shall  be  hanged,  and  if  a  leper,  burned." 
This  barbarous  order  from  a  King  who  is 
foolishly  supposed  to  have  been  delegated 
by  the  same  Pope  to  Christianize  the  Irish 
people— who  in  the  bogus  Bull  are  called 
"  Christians  only  in  name" — was  promulga- 

*  For  the  benefit  of  readers  who  may  not  fully 
understand  the  severe  nature  "f  an  ecclesiastical 
Interdict  when  issued  against  a  nation,  and  also 
for  a  better  appreciation  of  the  dread  felt  by 
Henry  II.,  it  may  be  well  to  state  that  in  a  dis- 
trict or  country  under  Interdict  the  churches 
were  closed  ;  the  bells  were  silent ;  solemn  re- 
ligious services  ceased  ;  the  sacraments  were  ad- 
ministered only  to  infants  and  the  dying ;  and 
the  interment  of  the  dead  took  place  without 
any  religious  services.  Thus  the  sovereign  was 
punished  through  his  subjects,  to  whom,  in  a 
short  time,  the  deprivation  of  all  the  aids  and 
ministrations  of  religion  became  intolerable. 
Hence  the  offender  was  eventually  compelled  to 
submission,  pleading  with  a  most  penitential 
spirit  to  the  Sovereign  Pontiff  to  forgive  his  ob- 
stinacy, to  raise  the  Interdict,  and  thus  restore 
again  the  sacraments  and  services  of  the  true 
Church  of  God  to  the  suffering  people. 


ted  in  Normandy  and  throughout  the    Eng- 
lish possessions  in  France. 

The  Letters  excommunicating  King  Hen- 
ry II.,  when  promulgated  in  England, 
threw  the  whole  kingdom  into  a  state  of 
consternation ;  the  excommunicant  could 
not  find  a  priest  to  celebrate  Mass  in  his 
presence.  And  in  this  crisis  the  unfortu- 
nate monarch  turned  to  the  Pope,  plying 
him  with  all  the  vast  influence  at  his  royal 
command,  in  order  to  have  the  Interdict 
raised.  But  Pope  Alexander  sternly  refused 
every  petition,  referring  both  the  King  and 
his  advocates  to  the  Archbishop  whose  sen- 
tence of  excommunication  against  the  hate- 
ful Henry,  Pope  Alexander  "most  heartily 
confirmed  ! 


The  brutal  murder  of  St.  Thomas  has  al- 
ready been  described,  and  when  the  news  of 
this  most  atrocious  crime  reached  the  ears 
of  Pope  Alexander  III.  he  shed  bitter  tears 
to  the  memory  of  the  saintly  Thomas 
A'Becket.  Such  indignation  did  the  Pon- 
tiff manifest  that  he  refused  to  see  any  Eng- 
lishman. "  Hold  !  hold  !"  exclaimed  the 
Pope,  to  one  who  was  about  to  utter  the 
detestable  name  of  the  King  of  England  in 
his  presence  :  "Such  a  name  may  not  be 
spoken  before  a  Sovereign  Pontiff."  Pope 
Alexander  then  hurled  the  anathemas  of 
the  Church  against  the  assassins,  with  all 
their  advisers  and  protectors.  All  this  oc- 
curred only  tivo  years  before  the  spurious 
date  (1172)  ascribed  to  the  fictitious  Bull ! 


The  Pontificate  of  Pope  Alexander  III., 
the  victorious  champion  of  Italian  liberty, 
the  courageous  asserter  of  the  sovereignty 
of  the  Apostolic  See  against  Kings  in  their 
fury  and  people  in  their  infatuation,  came 
to  a  close  in  glorious  victory.  After  twenty 
years  of  struggle,  persecution  and  exile,  the 
great  Vicar  of  Christ  rested  in  peace  on 
August  30th,  1181,  bequeathing  to  the 
Church  that  peace  which  he  had  won  for 
her  through  his  pious  courage,  prudence 
and  love  of  justice  and  liberty,  which  were 
the  brightest  ornaments  of  his  character. 
The  Pope  was  preceded  in  death  by  King 
Louis  VII.  of  France,  who  died  on  Septem- 
ber 18th,  1180,  and  as  this  King  will  figure 
in  the  controversy  over  the  two  bogus  Bulls 


III!        rOl'K       AND      IRKLAND. 


of  Adrian  and  Alexander  further  on,  we  al- 
lude to  the  matter  in  this  place  so  as  to  fix 
the  dates  upon  which  these  two  characters 
in  this  long-disputed  question  ceased  to  ex- 
ist About  this  time,  also,  there  disap- 
peared from  this  earthly  scene,  John  of 
Salisbury,  called  by  some  authors  "  Johan- 
nes Parvus,"  John  the  Little,  who  is  said  to 
have  received  the  bogus  Bull  from  Pope 
Adrian.  This  character  in  the  drama,  the 
plot  of  which  we  are  developing,  died  at 
Chartres,  France,  on  October  25th,  1180. 
He  was  the  author  of  several  works,  two  of 
which  we  expect  to  refer  to  hereafter. 
These  are  the  Polycraticus  and  the  Meta- 
logicus,  into  th"e  latter  of  which  was  first 
injected  (by  an  anonymous  interloper)  the 
fraudulent  account  of  the  Bull  claimed  to 
have  been  received  from  Pope  Adrian  by 
John  of  Salisbury  himself.  Of  this  more 
anon. 


Now  that  we  have  given  pen-pictures  of 
several  of  the  principal  actors  in  this  twelfth 
century  historical  melodrama,  let  us  take 
up  Judge  Maguire's  "Ireland  and  the 
Pope,"  so  as  to  refute  a  few  •  more  of  the 
false  statements  therein  which  he  picked  out 
of  the  works  he  quotes,  without  any  regard 
whatever  for  the  author's  reasons  prefixed  or 
affixed  thereto.  The  first  wisp  of  wisdom 
which  we  pluck  therefrom  is  the  following : 

"  In  the  year  1152  Ireland  was  a  prosperous 
and  independent  nation.  .  .  .  Her  people 
were  Catholics,  and  had  for  many  generations 
looked  lovingly  to  the  Pope  of  Home  as  their 
spiritual  father,  but  th«y  neither  owned  nor 
recognized  any  political  allegiance  to  him.'' 

Such  wisdom  as  is  manifested  in  the  fore- 
going extract  must  have  a  very  debilitating 
effect  upon  Judge  Maguire's  mental  vital- 
ity !  And  so  there  were  no  Protestants  in 
Ireland  in  the  year  1152— three  hundred 
and  thirty-one  years  before  Martin  Luther 
was  born !  Mirabil-e  dictu !  Ah !  deal 
•Fudge, 

'Twas  well  for  poor  humanity 

You  undertook  to  write, 
Your  amazing  erudition 
Is  so  very  erudite  ! 

How  important  it  is  to  know  that  in  the 
year  1152  there  were  no  Methodists  in 
Mullingar  ;  no  Baptists  io  Ballinasloe  ;  no 
£ongregaiionalists  in  Cort ;  no  Presbyteri  . 


ans  in  Portarlington  ;  no  Dunkers  in  Dub- 
lin ;  no  Campbellites  in  Castlecomer  ;  no 
Lutherans  in  Lismore  ;  no  Shakers  in  Shan- 
agolden  ;  no  Sabbatarians  in  Stradball) ;  no 
non- Conformists  in  Newtownmountken- 
nedy  ;  and  no  Salvation  Army  in  Sligo ! 
Such  information,  coming  as  it  does  to  Irish 
Catholics  whom  his  Honor  calls  a  people 
"  crushed  in  ignorance,"  and  from  so  super- 
eminent  a  dignitary  as  the  Superior  Judge 
of  the  Superior  Court  of  a  superior  city  like 
San  Francisco,  is  worthy  of  being  framed 
for  exhibition  among  the  curiosities  of  Cali- 
fornia in  the  cabinet  of  the  Pioneers'  Asso- 
ciation ! 

And  now,  dear  Judge,  since  you  have  so 
mjst  graciously  condescended  to  enlighten 
the  Irish  people,  who  have  been  "crushed  in 
ignorance,"  on  this  point,  will  your  Honor 
so  far  descend  from  your  high  dignity  as  to 
write  a  pamphlet  in  answer  to  this  query  : 
"  Why  is  it  that  there  were  no  inhabitants 
in  Ireland  until  people  first  settled  there  ?" 


The  next  specimen  of  Judge  Maguire's 
sapience  comes  to  the  crushed  "ignorant" 
Celts  in  this  fashion  : 

"In  that  fatal  year  (1152)  Cardinal  John 
Paparo  appeared  in  Ireland  as  a  special  legate  of 
Pope  Eugenins  III.  He  was  the  fleet  Italian 
legate  ever  sent  to  Iieland— may  Persico  be  the 
last !  He  summoned  the  bishops  and  principal 
priests  to  the  Synod  of  Kelt*,  and  there  deliv- 
ered palliums  to  the  archbishop",  taking  their 
oaths  of  obedience  to  the  Pope.  From  that  hour 
dates  the  downfall  of  Irish  nationality." 

Here  we  have  it  on  the  authority  of  the 
electric  legal  light  who  illumines  the  Su- 
perior Court  of  San  Francisco,  that  it  was 
palliums,  and  not  Papal  Bulls,  which  caused 
the  downfall  of  Irish  nationality  !  What 
profound  knowledge  !  What  beguiling  bald- 
erdash !  The  conferring  of  the  terrible  pal 
Hums  which  seems  to  have  made  his  Honor's 
anti-Papal  heart  palpitate  with  extraordin- 
ary emotion,  had  no  more  to  do  with  "the 
downfall  of  Irish  nationality'1  than  Judge 
Maguire  had  with  framing  the  Ten  Com- 
mandments ! 

As  one  of  those  Catholic  Irishmen  who 
have  been  "crushed  in  ignorance,"  we  also 
most  respectfully  desire  to  correct  his  Honor 
concerning  the  baneful  influence  which  the 
bestowal  of  the  apostate- scaring  pallium  is 
supposed  to  have  exercised  on  Ireland's  des- 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


45 


tiny.  The  first  papal  Legate  in  Ireland  was 
St.  Malachy,  Archbishop  of  Armagh,  who 
visited  Rome  about  twelve  years  before 
Cardinal  Paparo  was  sent  to  Ireland,  and, 
while  in  the  Eternal  City,  the  great  Irish 
saint  was  appointed  by  Pope  Innocent  II. — 
who  reigned  from  1130.  to  1143— Apostolic 
Legate  for  all  Ireland.  The  Pope  also 
promised  St.  Malachy  the  mysterious  pal- 
lium which  Judge  Maguire  seems  to  think 
is  a  kind  of  dynamite  bomb  invented  by 
the  Pope  specially  for  the  destruction  of  Ire- 
land ! 

When  St.  Malachy  was  in  Rome  he  asked 
the  Pope  for  pattiums  for  the  other  Arch- 
bishops of  Ireland,  but  the  Holy  Father 
said  he  preferred  to  have  petitions  presented 
from  the  ecclesiastics  of  the  several  Dio- 
ceses presided  over  by  Archbishops,  before 
sending  palliums  to  the  incumbents.  Here 
the  matter  rested  until  the  year  1145,  when 
Pope  Eugenius  III.  sat  in  the  Chair  of  St. 
Peter.  Two  years  after  his  election,  a 
National  synod  comprising  15  Bishops  and 
200  Priests  was  assembled  at  Holmpatrick, 
by  order  of  the  Primate  Gelasius,  and  there 
both  Bishops  and  Priests  petitioned  the 
Holy  See  to  confer  palliums  on  the  Metro- 
politans of  Armagh  and  Cashel.  They  also 
elected  St.  Malachy  as  their  representative 
to  the  Vicar  of  Christ.  The  saint  set  out 
on  his  journey  but  died  before  he  reached 
his  destination. 

The  death  of  St.  Malachy  delayed  mat- 
ters for  some  time.  Finally,  however, 
Christian,  Bishop  of  Lismore,  was  appointed 
Papal  Legate,  to  succeed  St.  Malachy,  and 
a  short  time  thereafter,  Pope  Eugenius  III. 
sent  Cardinal  Paparo  to  Ireland,  in  order  to 
carry  out  tlie  ivishes  of  the  ecclesiastics  of 
that  country.  A  National  Synod  convened 
at  Kells,  on  March  9th,  1152,  and  the 
Pope's  Legate  conferred  the  pallium  upon 
the  Metropolitans  of  Armagh,  Cashel,  Dub- 
lin and  Tuam.  The  pallium,  as  all  Catho- 
lics know,  is  merely  a  woolen  insignia  of  the 
fullness  of  the  Episcopal  office,  and  it  has 
no  more  political  significance  than  has  the 
archiepiscopal  cross  of  a  Metropolitan. 

Judge  Maguire  says  that  the  Irish 
Archbishops  "took  the  oath  of  obedience  to 
the  Pope,"  as  if  this  also  was  some  new- 


fangled notion  which  some  "foreign  poten- 
tate "  had  imposed  upon  the  Irish  episcopate. 
The  truth  is  that  from  the  early  ages  this 
rule  existed,  just  as  it  does  down  to  this 
day,  and  its  effect  no  more  circumscribes 
the  mental  or  political  independence  of  a 
Bishop  than  does  the  band  of  linen  which  is 
bound  round  his  head  during  the  ceremonies 
of  his  consecration. 

From  all  this  it  follows  that  neither  the 
visit  of  Cardinal  Paparo  to  Ireland  and  the 
reception  of  the  palliums  by  the  Archbishops, 
nor  the  oaths  taken  by  the  Metropolitans,  had 
a  single  feather's  weight  in  "  the  downfall  of 
Irish  nationality,"  even  though  the  High 
and  Mighty  Censuror- General  of  Popes,  Car- 
dinals, and  the  "  ignorant"  Irish  gives  a  con- 
trary opinion. 


Judge  Maguire  next  says  that  one  of  the 
benefits  which  accrued  to  "  Pope  Adrian's 
financial  and  political  advantage,"  was  that 
the  Pope  "  desired  to  put  Ireland  under 
tribute  to  the  Vatican;  the  Irish  people  hav- 
ing previously  paid  those  small  dues  called 
Peter-Pence  to  the  See  of  Armagh,  which 
the  rest  of  Europe  paid  to  Rome."  His 
authority  for  this  assertion  is  O'Halloran's 
History  of  Ireland;  but  as  the  greater  part 
of  that  work  was  compiled  by  a  number  of 
anti  Irish  Englishmen,  it  possesses  no  value 
as  a  History  of  Ireland.  The  truth  is 
that  Peter-Pence  was  not  paid  by  Ireland 
previous  to  the  invasion,  nor,  though  it 
was  expressly  promised  by  the  invaders  (ad- 
mitting for  argument's  sake  that  Adrian's 
Bull  was  genuine),  does  it  anywhere  appear 
that  a  single  penny  of  such  contribution 
was  ever  sent  to  Rome!  Right  here  arises 
another  doubt  concerning  the  genuineness  of 
the  Adrian  Bull,  inasmuch  as  if  that  docu- 
ment was  of  Papal  origin,  would  not  Pope 
Adrian  or  Alexander  or  some  of  their  imme- 
diate successors  have  forwarded  a  just  claim 
to  England  for  damages,  and  would  not  the 
Papal  authorities  have  declared  the  Bull 
null  and  void  in  consequence  of  the  King  of 
England  not  having  carried  out  the  money 
stipulation  in  that  supposed  agreement  be- 
tween himself  and  the  Pope '(  But  no  Pope 
ever  uttered  a  word  of  remonstrance;  no 
Cardinal  ever  carried  to  England  a  single 
complaint.  And  why  ?  Because  the  Bui 


46 


THK       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


was   hixjuit  and  its  terms   were   binding  on 
nobody  I 

Again,  if  the  Bull  were  genuine,  England 
forfeited  every  iota  of  authority  which  that 
document  gave  Henry  1 1.  over  Ireland.  The 
specific  purpose  for  which  the  Bull  is  said  to 
have  been  given  was  that  King  Henry 
should  have  certain  rights  in  Ireland,  pro- 
vided— as  the  document  quoted  by  Judge 
Maguire,  says — "that  you  (King Henry  II.) 
are  willing  to  pay  from  each  house  a  yearly 
pension  of  one  penny  to  St.  Peter,  that  you 
will  preserve  the  rights  of  the  churches  of 
the  land  whole  and  inviolate."  Did  King 
Henry  fulfill  these  stipulations  ?  Most  as- 
suredly not !  He  not  only  never  paid  a 
single  penny  in  Peter-Pence — nor  was  he 
ever  asked  for  it — but,  instead  of  "  preserv- 
ing" the  rights  of  the  Catholic  Church  in 
Ireland,  he  saw  churches  demolished,  mon- 
asteries destroyed,  and  he  quietly  acquiesced 
whilst  robbery  and  rapine  worked  the  ruin 
of  numerous  holy  Irish  shrines  !  Did  any 
Pope  chide  him  for  thus  breaking  his  bond  ? 
Most  assuredly  not.  And  why  ?  Because 
no  Papal  official  in  Rome  had  any  authorita- 
tive knowledge  of  the  existence  of  such 
Bulls  as  those  fraudulently  represented  to 
have  emanated  from  Popes  Adrian  IV.  and 
Alexander  III. 

Now,  even  as  prejudiced  a  critic  of  the 
rights  of  the  Catholic  Church  as  his  Honor 
the  Judge  of  the  Superior  Court  of  San 
Francisco,  will  be  forced  to  admit  thai,  when 
King  Henry  II.  failed  to  fulfill  these  obliga- 
tions, the  Bull  ceased  to  have  any  binding 
force  either  upon  the  Pope  or  the  Irish  peo- 
ple. The  document  became  so  much  waste 


paper,  just  as  it  really  was  from  the  first 
hour  of  its  forgery.  These  are  plain,  pal- 
pable facts  which  no  amount  of  pettifogging 
can  push  aside  ! 


In  accordance  with  the  unfortunate  habit 
he  has  acquired  of  manufacturing  historical 
facts  and  distorting  them  to  suit  his  own 
side  of  the  case,  Judge  Maguire  puts  this 
very  untruthful  text  into  his  remarkably  un- 
reliable publication  : 

"  That  everlasting  yearly  '  penny  from  every 
house'  again— the  price  of  poor  Ii  eland's  liberty. 
It  has  been  faithfully  paid.  England's  promise  to 
the  Vatican  has  been  faithfully  fulfilled  to  the 
letter ;  but  alas,  every  penny  of  the  tribute  baa 
been  atained  with  the  blood  and  tears  of  Erin's 
subjugated  children." 

This  paragraph  is  as  clear  a  perversion  of 
truth  as  we  have  yet  caught  Judge  Ma- 
guire in  telling.  There  is  not  a  single  word 
on  record  to  prove  that  England  ever  paid 
a  single  farthing  of  Peter-pence  in  fulfill- 
ment of  the  fraudulent  Bull. 

Rev.  P.  J.  Carew,  in  his  "Ecclesiastical 
History  of  Ireland,"  decides  the  whole  mat- 
ter by  saying— on  the  171st  page  of  his 
work — "Henry's  promises  to  Adrian  respect- 
ing the  Peter-Pence  appears  to  have  been 
wholly  forgotten  by  him.  The  exaction  of 
this  tribute  he  never  attempted  to  enforce  on 
Irish  subjects."  Thus  we  correct  another  of 
Judge  Maguire 's  ''mistakes,"  and  we  advise 
his  Honor  to  reserve  his  tears  in  future  in 
order  to  shed  them  over  his  own  false  his- 
tory, rather  than  to  waste  them  in  weeping 
over  supposed  wrongs  which  Ireland  never 
suffered  ! 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


CHAPTER    VII. 

The  Peter-Pence  Proviso  Continued.— More  Proof  Exhibiting  the  False  Character  of 
the  Stipulation. — King  John's  Surrender  of  England  to  the  Pope. — Important 
Documents  Relating  Thereto.— Additional  Evidence  of  the  Fictitious  Nature  of 
the  Two  Bulls  of  Adrian  and  Alexander. — The  Editor  of  Cambreusis  Criticises 
that  Falsifier's  Fabrications. 


In  our  last  chapter  we  showed  from  reliable 
historical  authority  that  Ireland  never  paid 
Peter- Pence  to  the  Pope,  in  accordance  with 
the  clause  of  the  bogus  Bull  attributed  to 
Pope  Adrian.  But  we  have  still  further 
proof  to  offer  in  this  direction.  During  the 
Pontificate  of  Pope  Innocent  III. ,  a  demand 
was  sent  by  that  Pontiff  to  the  Bishops  of 
England,  (but  not  to  those  of  Ireland)  de- 
manding some  over-due  Peter-Pence  from 
them.  This  is  strong  evidence  that  Pope 
Innocent  III.,  either  never  knew  of  any 
Bulls  by  Popes  Adrian  and  Alexander,  re- 
quiring Peter- Pence  from  the  Irish  people 
in  accordance  therewith,  or,  if  he  had  ever 
heard  of  them  he  looked  upon  them  as 
utterly  unreliable. 

On  page  189  of  the  first  volume  of  the 
Chronicles  of  Rymer,  Fcedora,  etc.,  will  be 
found  a  document  from  Pope  Innocent  which 
still  more  forcibly  sets  forth  the  fact  that 
the  Pope  never  knew  that  any  Peter- Pence 
was  promised  by  King  Henry  II. ,  on  the 
part  of  the  Irish  people.  The  document  in 
question  is  a  Letter  which  Pope  Innocent 
addressed  to  Cardinal  Nicholas,  Bishop  of 
Tusculum,  Legate  of  the  Apostolic  See  in 
England,  and  also  to  Pandolphus,  Sub-Dea- 
con, and  a  familiar  friend  of  the  Sovereign 
Pontiff.  In  that  Letter  Pope  Innocent  says  : 

"  As  every  house  throughout  all  England— as 
you  very  well  know— must  give  every  year  a 
penny  as  the  revenue  due  to  the  Holy  See,  the 
Prelates  of  England,  who  have  collected  the 
revenue  in  Our  name,  have  disposed  of  it  against 
the  will  of  the  owner,  and  they  have  not  feared 
to  keep  the  greater  part  of  it  for  themselves. 
They  have  sent  to  TIs  only  three  hundred  marks  ; 
and  they  have  kept  more  than  one  thousand 
marks  in  their  own  hands. 

Wishing,  therefore,  that  the  rights  of  the 
Roman  Church  be  protected,  We  command  you, 
by  the  authority  of  this  letter,  and  We  ordain 
expressly,  that  you  receive  in  the  first  place 
from  their  hands  the  sums  that  have  been  paid 
up  to  this  time,  and  to  oblige  them,  if  neces- 


sary, by  ecclesiastical  censures  without  appeal. 
Then  you  shall  enjoin  them  formally,  in  Our 
name,  to  pay  integrally  the  balance.  We  do 
not  see  what  title  they  can  allege  ;  they  cannct 
produce  a  privilege  granted  to  them  by  the  Holy 
See,  nor  can  they  prove  a  prescription  of  one 
hundred  years  against  the  Roman  Church. 

Given  at  the  Lateran,  on  the  5th  kalends  of 
February,  in  the  6th  year  of  Our  Pontificate." 

Here  we  find  that  Pope  Innocent  III., 
was  afforded  a  most  suitable  opportunity 
for  demanding  the  Peter-Pence  due  to  his 
Holiness  from  Ireland  under  the  bogus  bond 
which  is  attributed  to  King  Henry.  But 
the  Pope  never  once  alludes  to  it ;  he  in- 
sists upon  being  paid  the  collections  made 
in  England  to  the  last  penny,  but  he  leaves 
Ireland  entirely  out  of  the  question.  Now, 
we  ask  any  reasonable  individual,  what 
would  be  the  line  of  argument  used  in  the 
above  Papal  document,  if  Pope  Innocent 
had  the  slightest  claim  on  England  for  any 
Peter- Pence  collected  in  Ireland  ?  Would 
not  the  Pontiff  have  included  Ireland  in 
the  text  1  Most  assuredly  he  would,  as  his 
Holiness  was  not  to  be  cheated  out  of  his 
dues  with  impunity.  It  is  clear,  therefore, 
that  down  to  the  year  1206  the  Bull  of 
Adrian  had  no  status  whatever  in  the  mind 
of  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  and  here  again  we 
have  another  proof  that  the  Bull  attributed 
to  Pope  Adrian  IV.  was  a  flagrant  forgery. 


Now  let  us  cite  another  historical  event 
wherein  additional  evidence  lucidly  appears 
against  the  Peter-Pence  proposal  in  the 
fictitious  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian.  It  is  a  mat- 
ter of  history  that  in  the  year  1213  King 
John  of  England  (Lackland,  or  sans-terre) 
seeing  himself  without  resources  and  on  the 
brink  of  ruin,  placed  his  person  and  his 
kingdom  under  the  suzerainty  of  Pope  In- 
nocent III.  The  Golden  Bull  which  con- 
cluded that  compact  may  be  found  in 


48 


THR      POPK      AND      IKELAND. 


Rymer,  as  well  as  the  agreement  of  King 
John,  wherein  occurs  this  passage  : 

"  Not  determined  by  force,  nor  constrained 
by  terror,  but  of  our  own  free  and  spontaneous 
will,  and  of  the  common  council  of  our  Barons, 
we  offer  and  freely  concede  to  God,  to  His 
Apostles  Peter  and  Paul,  to  the  Holy  Roman 
Church,  our  Mother,  and  to  our  Lord  Pope  In- 
nocent III.,  and  his  Catholic  successors,  the 
whole  kingdom  of  England  and  the  whole  king- 
dom of  Ireland,"  etc. 

Then  the  prince  promises,  among  other 
things,  to  pay  to  the  Pope  one  thousand 
pounds  sterling  every  year,  being  £700  for 
England,  and  £300  for  Ireland,  under  pain 
of  forfeiture  for  himself  as  well  as  for  his 
successors. 

When  offering  his  kingdom  to  the  Holy 
See,  John  had  a  splendid  opportunity 
whereby  to  refer  to  the  Bull  of  Ad  nan, 
who,  about  seventy  years  previously,  had,  it 
is  alleged,  generously  given  over  the  spiri- 
tual and  temporal  affairs  of  Ireland  to  the 
tender  mercies  of  his  father,  King  Henry 
II.  The  prince  was  aware  of  the  alleged 
existence  of  the  Bull,  because  the  king- 
worshipping  Cambrensis  had  dedicated  to 
John  a  few  years  before,  the  third  edition 
of  his  Expugnatio  Hibe.rnica,  into  which  the 
dubious  document  was  inserted.  In  fact, 
so  eager  was  Cambrensis  to  attract  the  at- 
tention of  King  John  to  the  bogus  Bull, 
that  he  overshot  the  mark  by  a  special  ap- 
peal to  the  king  in  the  dedication  of  the 
work,  calling  the  particular  attention  of  his 
Majesty  to  that  document !  This  of  itself 
looks  very  much  like  one  of  the  many 
disreputable  tricks  which  Cambrensis  was 
famous  for,  and  it  also  tends  to  cast  addi- 
ditional  doubt  upon  the  authenticity  of  the 
Adrian  Bull. 


Another  query  arises  in  our  mind  right 
here  :  If  King  John  had  any  faith  in  the 
authenticity  of  the  Adrian  Bull,  ichy  did  he 
keep  silence  concerning  it  ?  Would  it  not 
have  been  more  in  accord  with  common 
sense  on  his  part,  as  well  as  on  the  part  of 
his  counsellors,  to  tell  the  Pope  that  he  was 
already  the  feudatory  of  the  Holy  See  in 
Ireland,  he  being  the  immediate  successor 
of  his  father  King  Henry  II. 

Instead    of  acting  in   this  rational   way, 


however,  we  find  the  ruling  monarch  ad- 
dressing the  Holy  Father  as  if  he,  the  King 
of  England,  was  entering  for  the  first  time 
into  negotiations  concerning  Peter-Pence 
with  the  Pope  of  Rome.  We  must,  there- 
fore, come  to  the  conclusion  that,  even  in 
the  estimation  of  the  son  and  successor  of 
King  Henry  II.,  the  Bull  of  Adrian  had  110 
value  as  an  official  document — even  when  he 
was  in  treaty  with  a  legitimate  successor  of 
the  Pope  who  is  said  to  have  made  it ! 


If  we  are  astonished  at  the  silence  of 
King  John  regarding  Pope  Adrian's  Bull, 
what  excuse  can  be  given  for  the  silence  of 
Pope  Innocent  III.  on  tlie  subject  1  It  will 
be  also  remarked  that  the  Pope  to  whom 
King  John  became  submissive,  says  nothing 
of  the  Bull  of  Alexander,  although  that  do- 
cument decrees  that  a  very  large  sum  should 
be  paid  as  Peter-Pence  by  the  people  of 
Ireland  to  the  Pope,  whereas  John  offered 
the  paltry  sum  of  three  hundred  pounds 
sterling. 

Now  we  ask  any  common-sense  citizen, 
who  has  the  slightest  idea  of  diplomacy,  if 
documents  of  such  vast  importance  as  the 
Bulls  of  Adrian  and  Alexander  would  not 
have  been  alluded  to  on  such  an  important 
occasion  as  the  one  we  have  described— pro  - 
vided  they  were  known  in  Rome  ?  Every 
person  familiar  with  the  mode  of  procedure 
in  the  execution  of  important  trusts  in 
Rome,  where  the  interests  of  a  whole  nation 
are  at  stake,  will  admit  that  there  is  no 
Court  in  Europe  where  genuine  documents 
are  more  frequently  cited  and  quoted  than 
by  the  Chancellor  of  the  Papal  Court. 
That  official  has  ever  been  noted'  for  de- 
claring that  the  Sovereign  Pontiff  "  walks 
in  the  footsteps  of  his  predecessor  Pope  So- 
and-so, "  that  he  "continues  the  work  they 
have  commenced,"  and  then  reference 
is  made  to  Bulls,  Briefs,  Concordats  or 
Letters  which  formerly  treated  of  the  ques- 
tion under  immediate  consideration. 

The  case  of  King  John  was  precisely  the 
opportunity  which  the  Roman  Chancellor 
would  have  been  delighted  to  take  advan- 
tage of  by  introducing  the  ancient  official 
style  of  "  Praedecessorum  nostorum  vestigiis 
inhaerentes,  evrumque  concessionem  appro- 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


49 


bantes  et  conjirmantes,  etc.,"  if  he  was 
afforded  the  opportunity.  But  that  official 
found  no  document  of  any  "  predecessor"  of 
Pope  Innocent,  in  whose  footsteps  his  Holi- 
ness could  "  walk,"  nor  could  the  Chancel- 
lor coerce  his  Pontiff  to  "continue"  a 
course  of  conduct  which  neither  Adrian  nor 
any  other  Pope  ever  commenced  !  It  is  per- 
fectly certain,  therefore,  that  neither  the 
Pope  himself,  nor  any  official  connected 
with  the  Papal  archives,  knew  anything  of 
the  so-called  Bull  of  Adrian  during  the 
Pontificate  of  Pope  Innocent  III. 


We  now  come  to  another  very  important 
feature  in  this  surrender  of  his  kingdom  on 
the  part  of  John  to  the  Pope.  It  takes 
two  to  make  a  bargain,  and  although  King 
John  offt red  "the  kingdom  of  Ireland''  to 
the  Holy  Father,  the  Vicar  of  Christ  en- 
tirely ignored  the  gift ! 

A  reference  to  Rymer's  Chronicles  (Vol. 
I,  pp.  179)  will  disclose  a  Letter  which  the 
Pope  addressed  to  the  Irish  people  on  Oc- 
tober 27th,  1213,  in  which  his  Holiness  al- 
ludes to  the  kingdom  of  England,  but  he 
never  joins  therewith  the  name  of  Ireland. 
The  Pope  styles  John  "  King  of  the  Eng- 
lish," without  adding  that  he  is  also  King 
of  Ireland.  He  says  that  "  the  Kingdom 
of  England  belongs —through  the  act  of  do- 
nation made  by  King  John — to  the  Church, 
and  that  she  possesses  "  a  special  right  over 
that  kingdom,"  but  does  not  say  that  the 
Church  also  received  by  John's  act  any 
temporal  power  whatever  over  Ireland  ! 

Need  we  comment  on  these  facts  1  We 
think  not.  They  prove,  with  all  the  force 
of  truth  that  Pope  Innocent  III.  well  knew 
that  although  King  John  of  England  offered 
his  Holiness  full  temporal  authority  over  the 
"  kingdom  of  Ireland,"  still  that  monarch 
did  not  possess  a  single  particle  of  title  to 
an  inch  of  that  island.  Hence  the  Pope 
wisely  ignored  John's  proposition  because 
he  knew  that  his  title  was  mythical. 

In  counselling  the  people  of  Ireland  as  to 
the  best  course  they  should  pursue  in  their 
diplomatic  relations  with  England,  Pope 
Innocent  never  makes  use  of  the  terms 
"obedience"  or  "submission"  to  any  Eng- 
lish monarch.  His  Holiness  recommends 


"benevolence"  and  "friendship"  on  the 
part  of  the  Irish  people  towards  King  John. 
Nor  do  we  see  how  the  Pope  could  do  other- 
wise, because  the  Vicar  of  Christ  was  fully 
cognizant  of  the  fact  that  he -as  the  custo 
dian  of  the  English  kingdom — possessed  n<> 
temporal  power  whatever  over  the  Bishops, 
princes,  nobles  and  people  of  Ireland. 
Hence  his  Holiness  could  never  think  of 
asking  them  to  submit  their  allegiance  to 
King  John  and  his  successors. 

Pope  Innocent  was  also  well  aware  of  the 
fact  that  only  a  small  fraction  of  Ireland 
was  in  the  possession  of  the  English,  and 
that  the  greater  portion  of  the  island  pres- 
erved its  independence.  The  Kings  of  Ire- 
land generally  continued  to  exercise  their 
regal  functions  in  peace ;  and  the  districts 
of  Ireland  which  the  English  did  not  oc- 
cupy preserved  their  independence  inviolate. 
But  even  supposing  that  the  Pope  had  re- 
quired submission  to  King  John  on  the  part 
of  the  Irish  people,  such  a  mandate  could 
only  affect  those  within  the  English  Pale, 
or  the  territory  which  Strongbow  and  his 
satellites  had  stolen  by  force  and  fraud. 


Returning  to  the  Letter  which  King  John 
sent  to  the  Pope,  we  call  the  attention  of 
our  readers  to  the  £300  which  that  prince 
promised  to  send  to  Rome  as  his  tribute 
from  Ireland.  But  so  little  value  did  Pope 
Innocent  III.  place  upon  the  king's  volun- 
tary offering,  that  his  Holiness  entirely 
avoided  all  mention  of  it  in  his  Letter  to 
the  Irish  people  !  Like  the  "  gift"  of  "  the 
kingdom  of  Ireland"  which  John  presented 
to  the  Pope,  his  Holiness  received  the  prom- 
ised £300  as  a  myth  which  looked  far  more 
substantial  upon  the  bond  of  surrender  than 
it  was  in  reality  ! 

In  point  of  ^fact  King  John  derived  no 
regal  title  whatever  from  Ireland.  Henry 
VIII.,  who  scandalized  the  world  about 
three  centuries  after  King  John,  wrote  a 
book  against  Luther,  and,  in  dedicating  it 
to  the  Pope,  he  styles  himself  King  of 
England  and  Lord  of  Ireland.  But  the 
Lord  knows  his  "lordship"  in  Ireland  hard- 
ly amounted  to  anything,  as  he  never  added 
a  solitary  inch  of  land  to  the  territory  his 
henchmen  usurped  !  On  the  other  hand, 


50 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


it  ia  known  to  all  readers  of  history  that  it 
was  not  until  the  time  of  Pope  Paul  IV., 
that  Ireland  was  erected  into  a  kingdom, 
and  this  occurred  some  three  hundred  and 
fifty  years  after  King  John  had  offered 
"the  kingdom  of  Ireland"  to  a  Pope  who 
had  no  idea  of  becoming  a  receiver  of  stolen 
goods  ! 


Whilst  we  are  treating  of  this  era  in 
English  history,  it  may  not  be  amiss  to 
introduce  another  instance  where  the 
Peter-Pence  paragraph  in  the  pretended 
Hull  of  Pope  Adrian  helps  materially  to 
prove  that  document  to  be  a  rank  forgery. 
Four  years  previous  to  the  events  just  nar- 
rated, Giraldus  Cambrensis  had  represented 
to  King  John  that  one  of  the  causes  which 
led  to  the  severe  reverses  which  the  English 
forces  had  met  with  in  Ireland,  arose  from 
the  fact  that  both  Henry  and  his  hopeful 
son  had  neglected  to  establish  the  collection 
of  Peter-Pence  in  Ireland,  in  accordance 
with  the  provision  of  that  Bull,  the  text  and 
terms  of  which  were  far  more  familiar  to 
Cambrensis  than  they  were  to  any  Pope  or 
Cardinal  in  the  Catholic  Church. 

In  conformity  with  the  advice  of  Cam- 
brensis, John  should  have  made  this  pro- 
position to  Pope  Innocent,  instead  of  offer- 
ing the  paltry  sum  of  fifteen  hundred  dol- 
lars to  the  Holy  See.  But  King  John  was 
— like  his  father— wise  in  all  things  wicked. 
He  had  his  suspicions  that  the  Adrian  Bull 
was  bogus,  and  so  he  studiously  avoided  all 
mention  of  it,  and  although  several  dona- 
tions of  £1,000  were  sent  from  England  to 
Rome,  the  whole  sum  was  credited  to  Eng- 
land, and  no  mention  whatever  made  of  any 
I>art  of  it  coming  from  a  country  which 
itome  knew  was  no  party  to  the  compact ! 


In  the  year  1234,  when  King  Henry  III., 
occupied  the  English  tlirone,  the  Peter-Pence 
collection  was  due  for  several  years.  So 
the  Pope's  Chancellor  wrote  over  to  England 
to  remit  the  back  dues.  The  response  of 
King  Henry  III.,  as  quoted  by  Rymer,  ia 
dated  February  25th,  1235,  and  states  that 
from  the  first  concession  of  the  tribute,  it 
was  stated  in  the  document  of  King  John, 
that  the  sum  of  £1,000  would  be  given  to 


the  Roman  Church  in  an  undivided  manner. 
Here  again  we  find  the  Adrian  Bull  ig- 
nored, the  document  sent  by  King  John  to 
the  Pope,  when  he  surrendered  his  king- 
dom to  his  Holiness,  being  quoted  as  the. 
first  concession  of  the  Peter-Pence  tribute  ! 
The  force  of  this  evidence  will  be  better  ap- 
preciated when  it  is  brought  to  mind  that 
the  Adrian  Bull  was  manufactured  by  order 
of  his  Majesty  Henry  the  Second,  nearly 
seventy  years  previously  ! 

These  historical  proofs  entirely  overcome 
any  assertions  that  can  be  advanced  against 
the  bogus  character  of  the  Adrian  Bull,  and 
now,  having  conclusively  proved  that  the 
Peter-Pence  clause  in  both  Bulls  was  false, 
misleading,  and  inoperative,  we  will  present 
some  new  phases  of  historical  evidence  in 
support  of  the  claim  of  truth  and  justice  on 
the  part  of  both  the  Catholic  Church  and 
the  Irish  people. 


We  have  before  us  as  we  pen  these  lines 
the  Topographic  Hibernica  and  the  Expuy- 
natio  Hibernica  of  Giraldus  Cambrensis, 
edited  by  James  F.  Diniock,  M.  A.,  Rector 
of  Barnburgh,  Yorkshire,  and  published  in 
London  in  1807.*  Now  let  us  open  this 
volume  and  hear  the  editor  describe  for  our 
edification  the  moral  and  intellectual  charac- 
ter of  Cambrensis,  whom  Judge  Maguire 
endeavors  to  glorify,  simply  because  that  an- 
cient perverter  of  truth  is  a  perjured  wit- 
ness against  the  Pope  of  Rome  and  the  in- 
nocent Irish  people. 

The  Editor  of  the  works  of  Cambrensis 
in  the  first  part  of  the  Preface  thereto, 
when  speaking  of  Cambrensis,  whom  his 
Honor  falsely  styles  "a  leading  Prelate," 
(misleading  would  be  the  proper  term) 
gives  these  reasons  why  the  works  of  that 
disreputable  author  were  not  transcribed  by 
the  monks  of  his  own  time  : 

"We  cannot  be  surprised  at  these  treatises 
having  been  no  favorite  subject  of  transcription 
in  the  scriptoria  of  our  larger  English  monas- 
teries, the  great  source  of  all  English  mediaeval 
manuscripts,  where  Giraldus  and  the  See  of  St. 
David  would  be  held  in  a  vastly  lower  degree  of 
importance  than  that  in  which  he  regarded  it 
and  himself.  His  bitter  abuse  of  monasticieni, 

'Official  edition  published  under  the  auspices 
of  the  Master  of  the  Holla. 


THE      POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


51 


moreover,  would  make  him  far  from  a  welcome 
inmate  generally  of  iconastic  libraries.  Hm 
Speculum  Ecclesiw,  especially,  could  only  have 
been  looked  upon  by  monks  as  a  piece  of  yross, 
lying,  blasphemous  ribaldry,  which  it  would  be 
no  venial  sin  for  any  monk  to  transcribe.  No 
wonder  that  some  of  his  works  have  so  barely 
survived  to  our  days" 

Such  is  the  estimation  formed  of  Giraldus 
Cambrensis  by  the  English  Protestant  Edi- 
tor of  his  works,  in  1867  !  The  Editor 
further  contradicts  Judge  Maguire's  as- 
sertion that  Cambrensis'  "  history"  ap- 
peared in  1173,  during  the  lifetime 
of  Alexander  III.  Now  as  Pope  Alex- 
ander departed  this  life  in  1181,  it  is 
scarcely  possible  that  he  came  out  of  his 
tomb  to  read  the  falsifying  "  history"  of 
Cambrensis,  even  supposing  that  author's 
first  attempt  at  libelling  the  Irish  people 
was  issued  as  early  as  1182  !  This  rectifies 
another  of  Judge  Maguire's  "mistakes." 

On  another  page  of  Mr.  Dimock's  Preface 
we  read  that  Cambrensis  did  not  complete 
his  first  work  until  the  years  1185  or  118G, 
so  that  by  no  possibility  can  Judge  Maguire 
squirm  out  of  his  very  peculiar  manner  of 
anticipating  events  and  manufacturing  his- 
tory to  suit  the  sentiments  of  splenic  hate 
which  impelled  him  to  commit  the  blunder 
of  issuing  his  bad  book. 


Turning  to  page  42  of  Mr.  Dimock's  Pref- 
ace, we  come  to  a  disclosure  which  throws 
very  considerable  light  upon  the  bungling 
manner  in  which  the  bogus  Bulls  were 
manipulated  by  Cambrensis  and  his  co- 
conspirators  against  both  Ireland  '  and 
the  Catholic  Church.  Alluding  to  the' 
omissions  and  subtractions  in  the  Cambren- 
sian  manuscripts,  Mr.  Dimock  makes  this 
damaging  revelation : 

"There  is  one  other  case  of  subtraction  to  be 
mentioned  and  a  most  strange  one.  In  the 
5th  chapter  of  the  2ad  book  (Expugnatio  Hiber- 
nico.)  the  early  MSS.  gives  under  the  year  1174 
or  1175  a  privilege  long  before  obtained  from 
Pope  Adrian  IV.  authorizing  Henry  II. 's  in- 
vasion of  Ireland  ;  and  a  confirmatory  one  of 
the  then  Pope,  Alexander  III,  with  some  pref- 
atory matter  principally  relating  to  the  persons 
employed  in  bringing  these  privileges  for  pub- 
lication into  Ireland  at  this  time,  and  to  the 
agency  of  John  of  Salisbury  in  having  pro- 
c  red  the  first  from  Pope  Adrian  in  1155.  But 


the  later  MSS.  omit  Alexander' i  privilege  and 
all  mention  of  him,  and  give  Adrian's  privilege 
only.  The  prefatory  matter  had  to  be  altered 
accordingly.  In  doing  this  they  marvellous- 
ly contrive  to  make  Henry  in  1172  apply 
for  and  procure  this  privilege  from  Pope 
Adrian  who  died  in  1159  (!!!)  And  with  equally 
marvellous  confusien  they  represent  John  of 
Salisbury,  agent  in  procuring  this  privilege  in 
1155,  as  sent,  not  to  Ireland,  but  to  Rome,  for 
the  purpose  of  publishing  it  at  >V  aterf  urd  iu 
1174  or  1175.  (!!!) 

In  a  foot-note  to  page  xliii. ,  from  whicli 
this  extract  is  taken,  Mr.  Dimock  adds  this 
explanation  which  throws  another  very 
serious  doubt  upon  the  genuineness  of  the 
Adrian  Bull : 

"  But  the  cause  of  the  suppression  of  Alexan- 
der's Bull,  and  the  germ  of  the  blundering  in 
the  prefatory  matter,  were  both  perhaps  sup- 
plied by  Giraldus,  in  his  copy  of  this  chapter, 
as  given  in  the  De  Instr.  Princ.  (p.  51,  etc.) 
He  there  states,  in  introducing  Alexander's 
privilege,  that  some  asserted  it  to  be  a  forgery  (I!!) 
and  hence  perhaps  its  suppression  afterwards 
in  the  Expwjnatio  by  some  rectifier  of  his  his- 
tory of  Henry's  papal  rights  over  Ireland." 

The  plain  meaning  of  this  paragraph  shows 
that — even  during  the  lifetime  of  Cambrensis 
— there  were  persons  who  suspected  Adrian's 
Bull  to  be  a  forgery.  This  completely  nul- 
lifies Judge  Maguire's  boast  that  the 
genuineness  of  the  Bulls  of  Adrian  and 
Alexander  was  not  challenged  when  first 
published.  Here  we  have  prima  facie  evi- 
dence that  Pope  Adrian's  Bull  was  forged, 
as  no  candid,  honest  or  truthful  historian 
could  make  such  fearful  blunders  or  such 
a  jumble  of  facts  or  dates,  unless  his  mind 
was  beclouded  by  the  darkness  of  doubt 
through  a  departure  from  truth  and  the 
adoption  of  falsehood.  A  manuscript  that 
had  to  be  altered,  amended,  revised  and 
corrected  after  the  manner  in  which  Mr. 
Dimock  proves  the  miscalled  "  history" 
of  Cambrensis  to  have  been  changed  and 
corrupted  by  that  author  himself,  is  entire- 
ly unworthy  of  any  respect  from  reasonable 
men  as  an  authority  upon  any  question  of 
fact  whatever. 

It  has  been  already  clearly  demonstrated! 
in  these  pages  that  Cambrensis  did  not 
possess  a  single  necessary  qualification  to 
entitle  him  to  be  ranked  as  a  historian  of 
Ireland,  but  in  case  any  person  might 


THE       POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


demur  to  this  sweeping  charge,  we  will 
again  have  recourse  to  the  testimony  of  Mr. 
Dimock —  the  Editor  of  the  works  of  Cam- 
brensis  and  the  man  who  is  supposed  to 
have  been  most  deeply  versed  in  his  writ- 
ings. Here  is  that  gentleman's  verdict, 
showing  how  entirely  valueless  Cambrensis 
is  for  any  purpose  : 

"  As  to  his  history  of  the  English  invasion,  it 
must  have  been  wholly  derived  from  the  English 
themselves,  and  in  great  measure  from  his  own 
near  friends.  If  Giraldus  had  been  the  moat 
cool  and  fair  and  unbiassed  of  writers  still  a  his- 
tory 80  derived  could  not  well  have  been  any- 
thing but  one-sided.  *  *  *  Giraldus  was  replete 
with  the  exact  qualities  the  very  reverse  of 
what  are  needed  to  form  au  impartial  historian. 
*  *  *  Giraldus  asserts  that  from  the  time  of 
St.  Patrick  there  had  never  been  a  single  Irish 
Bishop  who  had  manfully  striven  to  instruct 
and  correct  the  people,  and  this  he  asserts  though 
St.  Malachi's  fame  could  not  possibly  be  un- 
known to  him.  St.  Malachi  had  been  dead  only 


about  forty  years  ;  and  few,  if  any,  more  ear- 
neat  and  laborious  instructors  and  reformers 
can  perhaps  be  named  amongst  the  Bishops  of 
all  Christendom  of  all  times,  and  he  had  con- 
temporaries and  followers  not  unworthy  of  him. 
And  this,  too,  he  (Cambrensis)  asserts  of  the 
Isle  of  Saints,  for  ages  after  Patrick's  time  the 
great  nursery  of  missionary  Bishops,  Apostleit 
of  the  Faith,  throughout  the  wide  district  of  the 
Continent  of  Europe,  where  the  name  of  many 
an  Irish  saint  and  martyr  is  still  held  in  rever- 
ence ;  to  whom  also  was  due  the  conversion  of 
Scotland  and  of  a  large  part  of  Saxon  England." 

In  requires  no  comment  on  our  part  to  add 
any  additional  force  to  the  plain  truth  of 
the  foregoing  caustic  criticism  which  Mr. 
Dimock  makes  regarding  the  utterly  worth- 
less character  of  the  writings  of  Giraldus 
Cambrensus,  so  we  will  leave  the  character 
of  this  historical  hireling  in  the  keeping 
of  our  readers  while  we  pass  under  review 
other  matters  connected  with  this  period. 


CHAPTER      VIII. 

Proof  that  Giraldus  Cambrensis  knew  the  Adrian  Bull  was  a  Forged  Document. — His 
Spiteful  and  Slanderous  Sermon  in  Dublin. — The  "Synod  of  Cashel"  Critically 
Analyzed.  More  of  Judge  Maguire's  Mistakes  Made  Manifest. 


We  will  now  reveal  to  our  readers  an- 
other action  of  Giraldus  Cambrensis,  which 
will  serve  to  show,  that  he  himself  knew 
that  the  Bull  attributed  to  Pope  Adrian 
was  a  forgery.  Giraldus  composed  numer- 
ous works  (such  as  they  were)  and  whilst 
at  Rome  in  the  year  1190,  he  presented 
copies  of  them  to  the  Pope  and  several 
notable  Italian  Church  dignitaries,  but — 
with  the  cunning  of  a  genuine  conspirator 
against  truth — he  was  very  careful  not  to 
present  anybody  in  the  Eternal  City  with  a 
copy  of  his  Expugnatio  Hibernica,  which 
contained  the  spurious  Bull  of  Pope 
Adrian  ! 

In  the  year  mentioned,  Cambrensis  pre- 
sented Pope  Innocent  III.,  with  six  of  his 
.works,  but  the  Gemma  Sacerdotulis,  the 
infamous  Conquest  of  Ireland,  was  studious- 
ly kept  from  the  sight  of  that  Pontiff  or  any 
of  his  Cardinals  !* 

•Brewer's  Ed.  Cambrensia.  Edition  of  1861, 
Vol.  I.,  pp.  70. 


In  the  Symbolum  Electorum,  there  occurs 
a  letter  written  by  Cambrensis  to  the  Pre- 
micarius  and  Chancellor  of  the  Roman 
Court,  to  whom  he  presented  his  works  en- 
titled "  The  Topographia  of  Ireland,"  and 
the  "  Description  of  Wales,"  but  he  was 
cute  enough  to  conceal  from  the  prying  eyes 
of  that  Pontifical  Official  the  "Conquest 
of  Ireland."! 

Here  again  we  have  explicit  proof  which 
will  help  all  who  are  interested  in  this  in- 
tricate question  in  forming  a  just  opinion, 
and  of  coming  to  a  correct  conclusion,  that 
Giraldus  Cambrensis  knew  in  his  heart 
and  soul  that  the  Adrian  Bull  was  the 
outgrowth  of  early  British  '•  conspiracy 
against  truth,"  and  hence  he  kept  it  care- 
fully concealed  from  the  sight  of  those  who 
toould  have  discovered  the  fraud! 

Alluding  to  the  "sermon''  which  Giraldus 
preached  in  Dublin,  and  which  Judge  Ma- 

t  Brewer,  pp.  308. 


THE      POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


53 


guire  ignorantly  cites  as  evidence  that  Cam- 
brensia  was  "  a  leading  Catholic  Prelate  of 
the  time  of  Popes  Adrian  and  Alexander," 
Mr.  Dimock  gives  this  not  very  complimen- 
tary explanation  : 

"  Giraldus  first  made  this  assertion  [his  at- 
tack upon  the  Irish  Bishops  cited  last  week]  in 
a  sermon  which  he  preached  before  a  Synod  of 
the  Clergy  in  Dublin,  and  he  deliberately  re- 
peats it  in  the  Topographia  of  the  present 
volume,  and  again  long  afterwards  in  his  DC 
Rebus,  etc.  The  preacher  of  the  day  before, 
an  Irish  Abbot,  had  denounced,  and  very  justly, 
as  was  proved,  the  incontinence  of  the  English 
Clergy,  who  had  followed  the  invaders  into 
Ireland.  Giraldus  retaliated  in  his  sermon, 
with  a  sweeping  charge  of  excessive  drinking 
against  the  Irish  clergy,  but  adds  not  a  word  as 
to  any  attempt  being  made  to  prove  the  charge ; 
and  not  content  with  that,  he  then  makes  this 
charge  of  utter  neglect  of  duty  against  the 
Bishops  of  Ireland,  without  one  exception  since 
the  time  of  St.  Patrick.  It  was  bad  enough,  in 
a  moment  of  exasperation,  to  make  so  reckless 
an  assertion  ;  it  was  worse,  to  persist  deliberate- 
ly in  it  afterwards.  It  seems  incredible  that 
he  should  not  have  well  known  its  gross  false- 
hood, if  not  at  the  time  he  first  uttered  it,  at 
any  rate  long  before  he  repeated  it  in  the  DC 
Gestis  etc.  But  there  was  nothing  that  Gi- 
raldus had  once  said,  which  in  his  opinion  was 
not  well  worthy  of  being  said  again.  There  can 
be  but  one  opinion  of  a  historian  who  could  thus 
recklessly  make  an  untrue  statement,  and  thus 
deliberately  persist  in  it." 

What  can  honest  people  think  of  a  "  his- 
torian" who  would  make  a  false,  dastardly 
and  calumniating  charge  against  the  Prel- 
ates and  the  Priests  of  Ireland,  and  then — 
well  knowing  it  to  be  a  most  outrageous 
and  unfounded  slander — repeat  it  over  and 
over  again  ad  nuusiem  ?  Would  such  an 
unscrupulous  scribe  hesitate  for  a  moment 
to  assist  the  king  he  idolized  in  forging  a 
fictitious  Bull  ?  Besides,  Cambrensis  frank- 
ly admits  that  in  writing  his  book  on  Ire- 
land "  truth  was  not  his  main  object,"  but 
that  the  volume  was  especially  concocted 
"  for  the  purpose  of  sounding  the  praises  of 
King  Henry  the  Second."  Expect  truth, 
honesty,  or  even  ordinary  impartiality,  from 
such  a  villifying  villian  ]  As  well  look  for 
Truth  in  the  pit  of  perdition  !  But  per- 
haps some  reader  may  doubt  that  even  as 
debased  a  character  as  Cambrensis  so  com- 
pletely stultified  himself  as  to  admit  these 


telling  facts  so  clearly  showing  that  no  re- 
liance whatever  can  be  placed  in  a  single 
word  ever  written  by  this  champion  con- 
spirator against  truth.  In  order,  therefore, 
to  meet  any  such  objection,  let  us  turn 
again  to  the  work  before  us  and  we  will  find 
that  on  page  Ixix  of  Mr.  Dimock's  Preface, 
the  Editor  of  the  works  of  Cambrensis  thus 
explicitly  states  the  disreputable  reason 
which  that  author  had  in  writing  his  mis- 
called "  history."  Mr.  Dimock  says  : 

"  I  think  I  have  said  enough  to  justify  me  in 
refusing  to  accept  Giraldus's  history  of  the  Irish 
and  of  their  English  invaders  as  sober,  truthful 
history.  Somewhat  to  the  same  purpose  will  be 
found  occasionally  in  my  notes,  when  it  has 
seemed  to  me  allowable  to  compare  his  state- 
ments with  those  of  other  authorities.  Giraldus, 
indeed,  seems  himself  to  allow,  in  the  case  of 
the  Topographia,  that  truth  was  not  his  main 
object.  He  says  that  he  compiled  the  work  for 
the  purpose  of  sounding  the  praises  of  Henry 
II." 

Here,  therefore,  we  ask  any  candid  read- 
er, what  estimate  he  would  place  upon  a 
Papal  Bull  which  made  its  first  appearance 
in  the  world  through  the  works  of  such  an 
obsequious  scribe  and  such  a  malignant 
calumniator  of  the  whole  Irish  Episcopate  ? 
The  only  conclusion  every  impartial  person 
can  come  to  is  that  King  Henry  II.,  em- 
employed  Giraldus  Cambrensis,  John  of 
Salisbury  and  other  traitors  to  truth,  to 
concoct  the  bogus  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian, 
which  was  filed  away  and  not  taken  from 
its  hiding  place  until  about  twenty  years 
after  the  fictitious  year  forged  on  a  docu- 
ment which  is  dated  from  Rome,  although 
Pope  Adrian  was  not  in  Rome  at  that  time  ! 


A  great  deal  of  stress  is  laid  by 
those  writers  who  suppose  the  spurious 
Bull  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.  to  be  genuine, 
upon  what  is  generally  known  as  a  Confer- 
ence of  the  Irish  clergy  called  at  "  Cashell" 
by  order  of  King  Henry,  in  some  year  from 
1171  to  1177,  regarding  the  date  of  which 
there  are  as  many  different  opinions  as  there 
are  disputants  concerning  the  issuance  of 
the  Bull  itself. 

Judge  Maguire,  with  his  usual  blunder- 
ing derived  from  ignorance  of  the  facts  in 
the  case,  says  on  this  point  : 

"  Armed  with  these  Bulls,  King  Henry,  who, 


54 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


before  receiving  the  last,  had  entered  Ireland 
(October  18th,  1171),  claiming  it  under  that  of 
Adrian  IV.,  immediately  summoned  the  prin- 
cipal clergy  of  Ireland  to  meet  in  conference  at 


"This  conference  is  historically  known  as 
the  '  Synod  of  Cashel.'  Here  the  Bulls  of 
Adrian  and  Alexander  were  read,  and,  '  in  the 
name  of  the  Sovereign  Pontiff,  the  clergy  and 
people  of  Ireland  were  callod  upon  to  receive 
Henry  the  Second  of  England  as  their  king.' 

"At  this  Synod  the  Pope's  Legate  presided, 
St.  Geiasius,  the  Primate  of  Ireland,  having  re- 
fuged to  attend." 

These  paragraphs  are  all  right,  save  that 
the  date  (October  18th)  is  wrong  :  the  year 
(1171)  is  inexact:  the  "arming"  of  King 
Henry  a  bad  bull:  the  Synod  of  "  Cashell" 
is  a  myth  :  and  the  whole  matter  a  mis- 
leading fiction  manufactured  by  English 
writers  in  order  to  cover  up  King  Henry's 
iniquitous  invasion  of  Ireland  !  So  far 
from  being  "armed  with  these  Bulls," 
as  Judge  Maguire  stupidly  asserts,  the 
bogus  documents  were  lying  (in  far  more 
senses  than  one)  in  some  dark  corner  of 
Winchester  Castle,  ready  to  be  removed 
into  the  light  as  soon  as  the  parties  whose 
names  were  forged  thereto  had  "shuffled  off 
this  mortal  coil."  A  pretty  extensive  read- 
ing of  Irish  history  in  connection  with  this 
question,  justifies  us  in  boldly  asserting  that 
no  Conference  of  the  Irish  Hierarchy  or 
Clergy  was  held  in  "Cashell"  on  October  18th, 
1171.  Rev.  P.  J.  Carew,  in  his  "  Eccle- 
siastical History  of  Ireland,"  says  that  the 
Synod  at  which  the  bogus  Bulls  were  for 
the  first  time  publicly  read  in  Ireland,  was 
in  the  year  1175,  and  he  mentions  Water- 
ford  as  the  place. 

In  the  Appendix  to  his  work,  Father 
Carew  has  given  a  list  of  the  "  Principal 
Synods  held  in  Ireland  before  the  Thir- 
teenth Century.  "  This  list  is  copied  from 
Lanigan's  History,  and  the  only  Synods 
mentioned  from  1162  to  1172  are  the  fol- 
lowing : 

1170.  Synod  of  Armagh.  This  Synod  de- 
creed that  all  the  English  who  were  detained  in 
servitude  in  Ireland,  should  be  restored  to 
liberty. 

1172.  Synod  of  Cashel,  by  order  of  Henry  II.  , 
convened  for  the  purpose  regulating  some  matters 
of  ecclesiastical  discipline. 


Judge  Maguire's  statement  concerning 
the  Synod  of  October  18th,  1171,  will  have 
to  be  added,  therefore,  to  the  other  num- 
erous "mistakes''  for  which  his  Honor  is 
becoming  daily  more  notorious. 


Thomas  Moore  in  his  History  of  Ireland, 
also  gives  the  year  1175  as  the  date  when 
the  manipulated  manuscripts  first  saw  the 
sunlight  of  Ireland  fall  upon  their  fictitous 
faces.  This  writer  thus  describes  the  man- 
ner of  their  introduction  : 

"  It  was  about  this  time  (A.  i>.  1175)  that 
the  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian,  granting  the  kingdom 
ol  Ireland  to  Henry  II.,  and  obtained  by  this 
Sovereign  by  the  Holy  See  as  far  back  as  the 
year  1151,  was  for  the  first  time  publicly  an- 
nounced to  his  Irish  subjects.  *  *  *  The  persons 
appointed  to  carry  these  documents  to  Ireland 
were,  William  Fitz-  Aldelm,  and  Nicholas,  the 
Prior  of  Wallingford  ;  and  a  Synod  of  Bishops 
being  assembled,  on  their  arrival,  the  Papal 
grants  were  there  publicly  read." 

This  extract  does  not  look  as  if  King 
Henry  was  "  armed"  with  Bulls  to  any  very 
alarming  extent  wheu  he  went  to  Ireland, 
although  as  eminent  a  legal  authority  as  his 
Honor  the  Judge  of  the  Superior  Court  of 
San  Francisco  says  so  !  Tom  Moore's  his- 
tory, therefore,  is  far  more  likely  to  be  cor- 
rect than  Judge  Maguire's  miserable  liter- 
ary failure. 


Let  us  now  hear  what  the  Abbe  Mac- 
Geoghegan  has  to  say  on  this  subject.  This 
celebrated  historian  makes  no  mention 
whatever  of  any  Synod  of  Irish  Bishops 
being  held  in  Cashel  on  October  18th,  1171, 
nor  does  he  allude  to  the  introduction  of 
the  bogus  Adrian  Bull  at  any  time  during 
the  twelfth  century,  except  in  the  following 
paragraph  : 

"  About  this  time,  says  Ware,  fallowing  the 
English  authors  by  whom  alone  it  is  mentioned, 
Henry  II.  sent  Nicholas,  Prior  of  Wallingford. 
and  afterwards  Abbot  of  Malmsbury,  and 
William  Fitz-Aldelm  to  Ireland,  A.  D.  1175, 
with  the  Bull  of  Alexander,  which,  they  say, 
was  read  and  approved  of  at  an  assembly  of 
the  Bishops  at  Waterford.  This  Bull,  accord- 
ing to  them,  confirmed  that  by  which  Adrian 
IV.,  had  already  granted  to  this  prince,  the 
title  of  Lord  of  Ireland,  and  other  privileges." 

The    portions    of    the    above    paragraph 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


55 


which  we  have  placed  in  italic,  will  demon- 
strate at  a  glance  to  our  readers  how  en- 
tirely valueless  is  the  whole  assertion  !  In 
the  first  place,  every  person  familiar  with 
the  manner  in  which  Irish  history  has  ever 
been  concocted  by  English  authors,  is  well 
aware  of  the  fact  that  such  works  are  gen- 
erally genuine  "  conspiracies  against  truth. " 
In  the  second  place,  this  event  is  mentioned 
by  Bngliah  authors  alone,  and  upon  their 
authority  "it  is  said"  that  the  Alexander 
Bull  was  read  and  approved  of  in  an  as- 
sembly of  Bishops  !  This  whole  paragraph, 
therefore,  may  be  set  down  as  partaking  of  . 
that  fradulent  character  which  good  Father  , 
Tom  FJurke  (fJod  rest  his  soul  !)  s»  graphi- 
cally described  as  "  a  Thumping  English 
Lie  !" 


Among  the  most  valuable  Annals  of  Ire- 
land, are  those  of  Maurice  Regan,  secre- 
tary and  interpreter  of  Dermod  MacMur- 
rough,  last  King  of  Leinster,  and  the  man 
through  whose  evil  ways  the  English  first 
entered  Ireland.  The  Chronicles  of  Began 
embrace  that  important  era  in  Ireland  be- 
tween the  years  1167  and  1173,  and  most 
assuredly  King  Henry  the  invader  could 
not  have  been  "armed"  with  the  ammunition 
of  the  bogus  Bulls,  without  the  chronicler 
making  some  mention  thereof.  Yet  Kegan 
is  as  silent  as  a  Sphinx  on  the  subject. 

The  work+  is  one  of  the  rarest  books  on 
Irish  history  extant,  and  it  contains  some 
very  valuable  statistics,  as  well  as  speci- 
mens of  the  singular  title-deeds  which  the 
King  of  England  made  to  the  different  in- 
vaders of  the  lands  of  Ireland.  As  a  speci- 
men of  the  orthographical  combinations  of 
the  English  language  in  the  last  century  we 
append  the  opening  paragraph  in  the  pref- 
ace, which  was  written  in  1747  : 

"It  apperith  that  this  History  followeing 
was  written  by  one  callid  Maurice  Began  (some 
tymes  mentioned  in  this  Discourse)  who  was 
Ssrvauut  and  Interpreter  unto  Dermott  Mac- 


£  "  HlBEENlCA  :  Or,  some  Antient  Pieces  re- 
lating to  Ireland.  Part  I.  Containing  the 
History  of  Ireland  by  Maurice  Regan.  Servant 
and  Interpreter  to  Dermod  BCaoManronxh, 
King  of  Leinster,  translated  from  the  Irish  into 
French  and  from  thence  into  English  bv  Sir 
Georee  Carew,  Lord  President  of  Munster. 
Dublin  :  Printed  for  John  Millik»n  (at  No. 
10)  in  Skinner-Row.  M,DCC,LXX." 


Murroyh,  Kyng  of  Leinster,  and  put  into  French 
Meetre  by  one  of  his  familiar  Acquaintaunce  : 
'  *  *  It  endith  abruptly  at  the  winning  of 
Limeiick,  which  was  not  full  three  Yeres  after 
Robert  Fitz-Stephen  his  first  arrivall  in  Ireland."  , 

Concerning  the   manner  in   which  King 
Henry  of  England  became  connected  with 
Ireland,  the  chronicler  of  this  work   (under    ; 
date   of  1168-9)  after  recounting   Dermod    ' 
MacMurrough's  visit  to  Henry  the  Second, 
says: 

"  When  he  came  to  the  presence  of  Kyng 
Henry,  he  related  at  large  unto  hyiu  the  Cause 
of  his  Comying,  telling  hym,  that  his  vassals 
had  forsaken  hym  ;  that  he  was  forced  to  runne 
iu to  F,  tile,  and  beseechinge  hym  to  gyve  hym 
Aide,  whereby  he  mought  be  restorui  to  his  In- 
heritance ;  which  yf  it  shuld  plese  hyin  in  his 
goodness  to  graunt,  he  would  acknowledge  hym 
to  be  his  Lorde,  and  serve  him  faithfully  during 
his  Life." 

"THIS  petiful  Relation  of  the  distrepsed 
Kyng  so  much  movid  Kyng  Henry  to  Com- 
passion, as  that  he  promised  him  Aid,  and 
willed  him  to  return  to  Bristol!,  ther  to  Re- 
mayne  untill  he  herd  futhir  from  hym  ;  and 
with  all  he  wrot  to  Robert  Harding,  rtquireing 
hym  to  receve  Kyng  Dermod  and  his  Followers 
into  his  House,  and  to  intreat  them  with  all 
the  Courtesie  and  Humanitie  he  could  ;  wherof 
Robert  failed  in  Nothing. 

"  AFTIK  that  Kyng  Dermod  had  remained 
more  than  a  Moneth  in  Bristoll,  and  seeing  no 
hope  of  Aide  from  Kyng  Henry,  weary  of  delaye, 
and  Comfortless,  he  went  to  the  Erie  Richard, 
intreating  Succours  from  hym,  and  prom- 
ising, that  yf  by  his  Means  he  mought  be  re- 
established in  his  Kyngdome,  that  he  would 
gyve  hym  his  Daughter  to  Wife,  and  with  her 
the  whole  Kyngdom  of  Leinster  for  his  In- 
heritaunce.  The  Erie  tickled  with  so  fair  an 
Offer,  made  Answeare,  that  if  he  culd  obteyne 
leave  of  the  Kyng  his  Mastir,  he  would  not 
fail  to  Assiste  him  in  his  Person,  and  bridge 
sumciaunt  Aid  ;  but  for  the  present  he  desired 
to  be  excused  ;  for  unless  the  Kyng  wuld  give 
his  Assent  ther  unto,  he  durst  not  entertaine  a 
Business  of  that  Importance. 

"THIS  faire  and  discreet  Answear  so  well  con- 
tentid  the  exiled  Kyng,  as  he  solemnly  Sware, 
that  whensoever  the  Erie  did  bring  Aide  unto 
hym,  he  wuld  gyve  him  his  Daughter  in  Mar- 
riage, and  after  his  Death  the  Kyngdome  of 
Leinster.  These  Conditions  bring  agreed  on 
either  Party,  Dermond  departid,  and  went  to  St. 
David's,  where  h«  staid  untill  Shipping  was 
provided  to  Traasport  hym  into  Irland. 

"!N  the  meane  tyme  while  the  banished  Kyng's 
Shipping  was  in  prepareing,  he  was  Advised  to 


56 


THB      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


goe  and  Visite  a  King  in  Walts,  called  Rice, 
to  Desyre  hym  to  Eulardge  out  of  his  Prison  a 
(jreutilman  callid  Robert  Fill-Stephen  ;  but  how 
the  sayd  Robert  was  taken,  or  for  what  Offence 
InrjrUoned,  I  doe  not  understand  ;  but  that  he 
was  Enlargid  by  King  Rice,  at  the  request  of 
the  Kyng  of  Ltinstcr,  I  atn  well  Assured. 

"HAVlNQobleyned  his  Request,  he  returned  to 
St.  David's,  carrying  no  more  Englishmen  with 
him  than  one  Gentilman  called  Richard  Fitz- 
G-tdobcrt,  who  had  many  good  Parts  in  him, 
but  BO  slenderly  attendid,  as  they  were  of  small 
use  for  King  Dermond,  when  he  came  into  Ir- 
land  ;  wherfore  he  licenced  them  to  depart 
home. 

'THE  Kyng  of  Leiruter  findinge  it  to  be  an  Im- 
possibility ior  hym  to  recovir  his  Kyngdome, 
and  to  prevaile  in  hys  Designs  without  Aid 
out  of  England,  Dispatched  his  Trusty  Servaunt 
and  Interpreter,  Maurice  Regan,  with  Letres 
into  Wales,  and  with  Auctority  in  hys  Name  to 
promUe  all  souche  as  wuld  come  to  serve  hym 
in  his  Wars  in  Irland  large  Recompence  in 
Landes  of  Inheritaunce  to  souche  as  wuld  staye 
in  the  Country,  and  to  those  that  wuld  returne, 
he  would  gyve  them  good  Intertainment  eyther 
in  Money  or  in  Cattle.  As  soone  as  these 
Promises  were  divulged,  Men  of  all  Sortes,  and 
from  divers  Places,  preparid  themselves  to  goe 
into  Irland,  first,  especially  Robert  Fits-Stephen, 
a  Man  of  good  Esteeme  in  Wales,  (who  had 
lately  been  ealargid  out  of  Prison  by  the  Media- 
tion of  Dermond)  undirtooke  the  Imployment, 
and  with  hym  some  nine  or  ten  Knights  of  good 
account,  namely." 

We  cite  these  passages  in  order  to  show 
our  readers  that  the  invasion  of  Ireland 
was  decided  upon  by  Henry  of  England 
long  before  he  thought  of  forging  the  two 
bogus  Bulls.  And  now  let  us  turn  to  this 
author's  account  of  King  Henry's  landing  in 
Ireland,  which  appears  under  date  of  1171- 
2-3,  in  the  following  quaint  style  of  spell- 
ing : 

"A.  I).  1171.  Assoonaathe  Winde served,  Kyng 
Henry,  attended  by  Erie  Richard,  Fitz  Aldelme, 
Humfrie  de  Bohun,  Hugh  de  Lacy,  Robert  Fitz- 
Bernard,  with  divers  others  Lordes,  Erles  and 
Bctr.jnn.  besides  four  Hundred  Knights  and 
four  Thousand  Soldiers  imbarqued  for  Irland, 
and  Undid  nere  unto  Waterford ;  which  City 
the  Erie  Richard  deliverid  unto  hym,  and  did 
Homage  for  the  Kyngdome  of  Leinster,  the  In- 
heritaunce  whereof  was  graunted  unto  hym  ; 
the  Government  of  Waterford  was  bestowed 
upon  him  Robert  Fitz-Bernard  ;  but  before  the 
Kyng's  departur  the  Men  of  Weixford,  as 
they  promised,  brought  Robert  Fizt-Stephen, 
and  delivered  him  unto  the  Kynge,  where  in 


the  presence  of  all  that  were  present  he  sharp- 
ly reproved  Fitz-Steph«n  for  big  past  Mis- 
demeanours. He  made  his  humble  Excuse, 
and  all  the  Lordes,  as  well  Euglish,  Normans, 
and  Flemings,  became  Suretie  for  his  future  Be- 
haviour. 

"  A.  i).  1172.  THE  Kyng,  making  but  little 
Staie  at  Waterford,  marched  into  Dublin,  whych 
City  the  Earle  deliverid  unto  him  ;  who  com- 
mitted the  keepeinge  thereof  to  Hugh  de  Lacy. 

Ai'TiK  some  small  abode  at  Dublyn,  the 
Kynge  tooke  his  Jorney  into  Mounster,  where 
the  Archbishop  of  Cashell  came  unto  him  hym  ; 
at  Lismore  he  gave  Direction  for  the  building 
of  a  Castle ;  from  whence  he  returned  into 
Leinster. 

"THE  Kynge  made  his  aboade  at  Dublin,  and 
the  Earle  Richard  at  Kildare ;  and  in  thyg 
Tyme  of  the  Kyng's  beinge  in  Irland  all  sorts 
of  Victualles  were  at  excessive  Rates. 

"  WHILE  the  Kyngo  remained  at  Dublin,  by 
Messingers  and  Intelligence  out  of  England  he 
was  certified,  that  his  Son,  the  yonge  King 
Henry  had  rebelled  against  him,  and  that  Nor- 
mandie  was  in  Danger  to  revolt  unto  hym. 

"THIS  ill  News  troubled  the  Kyng  beyond 
all  Measure  ;  and  enforced  him  to  hasten  his 
return  out  of  Ireland.  The  Cittie  of  Waterford 
he  left  in  the  Custodie  of  Robert  Fitz-Bernard, 
and  Dublyn  unto  Hugh  de  Lacy.  Robert  Fitz. 
Stephen,  Meyler  Fitz-Henry  and  Myles  Fitz- 
David  were  in  a  sort  restrained,  and  to  remain 
at  Dublyn  with  Lacy.  Before  his  Departure 
from  Dublyn  he  gave  unto  Hugh  de  Lacy  the 
Inheritaunce  of  all  Meath,  to  hold  of  hym  at 
fifty  Knight  Fees,  and  unto  John  de  Courcey 
he  gave  all  Ulster  if  he  could  conquer  it. 

"A.  D.  1173  WHEN  the  Kynge  had  taken 
provisional  Order  for  the  Affairs  of  Irland,  he 
went  to  Weixford,  where  he  imbarqued,  and  ar- 
rived at  Forth' nan  in  Wales,  halfe  a  League 
from  St  David's,  and  in  his  Companie  Miles  de 
Cogan,  whom  he  carryed  with  hym  out  of  Ir- 
land ;  and  from  thence  with  all  possible  Expedi- 
tion he  passed  through  England,  and  so  into 
Normandie." 

Hero  we  find  that  tho  only  allusion  to 
"  Cashell"  is  that  King  Henry,  being  in 
the  province  of  Munster  in  1172,  the  Arch- 
bishop of  "Cashell"  paid  him  a  visit.  There 
was  no  Synod,  therefore,  or  assuredly  this 
chronicler  who  was  living  at  that  period 
would  have  mentioned  such  an  important 
assemblage  of  the  Irish  Ecclesiastical  body. 

We  now  turn  to  the  "  History  of  Ireland" 
by  Sister  Mary  Francis  Clare,  popularly 
known  as  "the  Nun  of  Kenmsre,"  whom 
Judge  Maguire  vain-gloriously  alludes  to  as 

- 


THE      POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


57 


one  of  the  Irish  historians  who  "attest 
to  the  genuineness  of  the  Adrian  Bull." 
But  in  this  regard,  as  in  a  great  many  other 
matters  in  his  bad  book,  Judge  Maguire 
misjudges  this  author's  opinions  from  a  ran- 
dom foot-note.  If  the  careless  author  of 
"  Ireland  and  the  Pope'1  had  opened  the 
Nun  of  Kenmare's  work  at  pa^e  259,  he 
would  have  saved  us  the  trouble  of  ex- 
posing his  shallowness,  as  therein  he 
would  have  read  the  following  opinion  of 
that  estimable  Sister,  upon  the  favorable 
Letter  which  King  Henry  gave  to  Dermod 
MacMorrough  when  he  asked  the  English 
monarch  for  help  to  reinstate  him  in  his 
Irish  possessions  : 

The  royal  letter  ran  thus  :  "  Henry,  King 
of  England,  Duke  of  Normandy  and  Aquitaine, 
and  K-irl  of  ADJOU,  to  all  his  liegemen,  English, 
Norman,  Welsh  and  Scotch,  and  to  all  the  na- 
tions under  his  dominion,  sends  greeting.  As 
soon  as  the  present  letter  shall  come  to  your 
hand,  know  that  Dermod,  Prince  of  Leinster, 
has  been  received  into  the  bosom  of  our  grace 
and  benevolence  :  wherefore  whosoever,  within 
the  ample  extent  of  our  territories,  shall  be 
willing  to  lend  aid  towards  this  prince  as  our 
faithful  and  liege  subject,  let  such  person  know 
that  we  do  hereby  grant  to  him  for  said  purpose 
our  licence  and  favor." 

"  Commenting  on  this  Letter,  the  Nun  of 
Kenmare  says  : 

"  In  this  document  there  is  not  even  the  re 
molest  reference  to  the  Bull  of  Adrian,  conferring 
the  island  of  Ireland  on  Henry,  although  the 
Bull  had  been  obtained  some  time  before.  In 
lohatcver  light  we  may  view  this  omission  it  is 
certainly  inexplicable." 

This  extract  proves  that  the  good  Nun  of 
Kenmare  was  not  thoroughly  convinced  of 
the  genuineness  of  the  Adrian  Bull.  But 
we  have  other  proofs  from  this  author, 
that  also  offset  Judge  Maguire's  claim 
upon  this  gifted  writer  as  coinciding  with 
the  English  writers  on  this  subject.  Al- 
luding to  the  Synod  of  Cashel  —regarding 
which  no  date  is  given — the  Nun  of  Kenmare 
says : 

"The  Synod  of  Cashel,  which  he  (Henry) 
caused  to  be  convened  was  not  attended  as  num- 
erously as  he  had  expected,  and  the  regulations 
made  thereat,  were  simply  a  renewal  of  those 
which  had  been  made  previously.  The  Primate 
of  Ireland  was  absent,  and  the  Prelates  who  as- 
sembled there,  far  from  having  enslaved  the 


State  to  Henry,  avoided  any  interference  in 
politics  either  by  word  or  act.  It  has  been  well 
observe  1  that  whether  "piping  or  mourning," 
they  were  not  destined  to  escape.  Their  office 
was  to  promote  peace.  So  long  as  the  perma- 
nent peace  and  independence  of  the  nation 
seemed  likely  to  be  forwarded  by  resistance  to 
foreign  invasion,  they  counselled  resistance  ; 
when  resistance  was  hopeless  they  recom- 
mended acquiescence,  not  because  they  believed 
the  usurpation  less  u-ijmt,  but  because  they 
considered  submission  the  wisest  course.  But 
the  Bull  of  Adrian  had  not  yet  been  produced  ; 
and  Henry's  indifference  abjut  this  document, 
or  his  reluctance  to  use  it,  shows  of  how  little 
reil  importance  it  was  considered  at  the  time." 

This  extract,  taken  in  connection  with  the 
preceding  one,  does  not  look  as  if  the  Nun 
of  Kenmare  had  the  unreserved  faith  in  the 
genuineness  of  the  Adrian  Bull  which  Judge 
Maguire  credits  her  with.  That  estimable 
friend  of  Ireland,  on  the  contrary,  seems  to 
have  had  very  serious  misgivings  on  this 
point,  even  when  she  wrote  her  history  a 
quarter  of  a  century  ago,  and  we  have  little 
doubt  but  when  Sister  Mary  Francis  reads 
the  MONITOR'S  revelations  on  this  subject, 
she  will  become  thoroughly  convinced  that 
both  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls  were 
•bogus. 


The  next  extract  we  make  from  the  anti- 
M*guirean  pages  of  the  Nun  of  Kenmare's 
history  is  entirely  in  opposition  to  his 
Honor's  idea  that  King  Henry  had  "armed" 
himself  with  bogus  Bulls  before  he  left  the 
British  shores  in  order  to  invade  Ireland. 
In  fact  he  was  in  England  for  several  years 
before  the  spurious  documents  were  com- 
pleted sufficiently  to  present  them  in  public. 

"  Henry  now  considered  it  time  to  produce 
the  Papal  Bulls,  A.  i>.,  1175.  He  therefore  dis- 
patched the  Prior  of  Wallingford  and  William 
Fitz-Aldelm  to  Water  ford,  where  a  synod  of 
the  clergy  was  assembled  to  hear  these  important 
documents.  *  *  *  Our  historians  have  not  in- 
formed us  what  was  the  result  of  the  meeting. 
Had  the  Papal  donation  appeared  a  matter  of 
national  importance,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that 
it  would  have  excited  more  attention." 

A  Synod  of  "  the  Clergy  of  Ireland"  could 
have  no  standing  in  Canon  Law  unless 
presided  over  by  some  Prelate  and  author- 
ized by  the  Pope's  Legate  or  the  Archbishops 
and  Bishops  of  that  country.  It  is  sheer 


58 


THE      rOPK       AND      IRELAND. 


folly,  therefore,  to  speak  of  a  "  Synod  of 
the  Clergy  of  Ireland"  having  ever  convened 
in  that  Island  of  Saints  for  any  such  pur- 
pose. A  Synod  even  of  "  the  Clergy"  which 
was  so  insignificant  in  size,  substance  and 
sacerdotal  character  as  not  to  be  worthy  of 
being  chronicled  by  Irish  historians,  must 
have  been  a  very  mythical  body !  Even 
Water jord,  the  place  where— according  to 
English  writers  only — the  supposed  Synod 
was  held,  would  be  the  last  place  in  Ireland 
which  the  Irish  Bishops  would  select  for 


assembling.  This  fact  will  not  fail  to  strike 
our  readers  when  they  have  learned  the 
character  of  the  class  of  people  who  forcibly 
entered  and  occupied  Waterford  both  at  the 
time  of  the  Anglo-Norman  invasion  as  well 
as  for  centuries  previous. 

We  will  now  give  our  readers  aome 
idea  of  the  early  inhabitants  of  Waterford, 
which  will  go  far  towards  showing  why  a 
bogus  Bull  should  be  brought  before  a  bogtm 
Synod— even  supposing  that  such  a  gather- 
ing ever  took  place. 


CH APTEK      IX. 

A  Description  of  Waterford's  Inhabitants. — A  Favorite  Abiding  Place  of  Danes, 
English  and  other  Enemies  of  Ireland. — When  that  See  was  Established. — Why 
no  Synod  Ever  Met  There. — Pope  Alexander  and  the  Irish  Bishops.— Another  of 
Judge  Maguire's  "Mistakes"  Made  Minced-meat  of. 


Waterford  is  one  of  the  most  ancient 
maritime  ports  of  Ireland,  and  was  known 
as  far  back  as  the  second  century  by  the 
name  of  Cuan-na-grain,  or  "  The  Harbor  of 
the  Sun."  But  its  present  name  of  Water- 
ford  is  generally  supposed  to  be  a  corrup- 
tion of  the  Scandinavian  Voder  Fi&rd, 
or  the  "  Ford  of  Father,"  and  this  name  it 
received  from  the  foreign  freebooters  from 
the  North  of  Europe  who  landed  there  as 
early  as  the  ninth  century.* 

For  nearly  three  hundred  years  prior  to 
1175,  Waterford  had  been  the  headquarters 
in  Ireland  of  the  piratical  Danes,  who  es- 
tablished a  regal  dynasty  there  under 
Sitrack,  which  continued  to  exist  down  to 
the  Norman  invasion.  It  was  in  Waterford 
that  the  first  body  of  Norman  freebooters 
landed,  and  it  was  the  same  place  which 
King  Henry  selected  as  his  landing  place 
so  as  to  arrive  in  the  midst  of  his  friends. 

Waterford  was  also  the  scene  of  one  of 
the  most  barbarous  deeds  that  ever  black- 
ened the  pages  of  history,  and  one  well 
worthy  of  being  the  first  act  in  the  bloody 
drama  which  English  tyranny  has  acted 
upon  Ireland's  stage  since  it  first  baptized 

*Marmipn'8  Ancient  and  Modern  History  of 
the  Maritime  Pprt?  of  Ireland. 


that  beautiful  land  in  blood,  seven  centuries 
ago. 

The  advance  guard  of  the  Anglo-Norman 
invaders    under  Strongbow,   built   a   small 
fort  near  Waterford,  and  seized  all  tne  cattle 
in  the  surrounding  district.      They   had  in- 
vaded the  land  of  a  peaceable  people,  and  to 
pilfer  the  personal  property  of  the  rightful 
owners  of  the  soil,  was  a  most  suitable  ac- 
tion with  which  to  open  the  Anglo-Norman 
campaign  in  Ireland.      The  robbery  of  their 
cattle  so  incensed  the  native  Irish  that  they 
very  naturally  assembled  in  order  to  drive 
off  the  piratical  pilferers  from  their  locality, 
but  an  unarmed   and   undisciplined  crowd 
was  no   match  for  the   Welsh  and  Anglo- 
Norman  soldiers,  encased   in   coats-of-mail 
and  armed   with    warlike    weapons.      The 
result  was    that    five  hundred   Irish   were 
slain  and  a  large  number   taken  prisoners, 
among   whom   were  some  of  the  principal 
inhabitants  ;  and  although   large    sums    of 
gold   were  offered   for  their  ransom,  these 
proto-martyrs  in  defence  of  their  homes  and 
property    were  most  brutally  murdered  by 
England's  savage  hirelings.      According  to 
an  English  annalist,  these  unfortunate  Irish- 
men  were   marched  up   on   the  high  cliffs 
adjoining   the  sea,    where   their  limbs  were 


THE      POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


59 


broken  in  the  most  brutal  manner,  and 
their  bleeding  bodies  then  cast  headlong 
on  the  rocka  beneath  !  Such  was  the  first 
scene  enacted  by  England's  minions  when 
the  shadow  of  their  blighting  presence  fell 
upon  the  virgin  soil  of  virtuous  Ireland  ! 
It  was,  as  already  stated,  in  Waterford, 
also,  that  King  Henry  landed,  when  he 
went  to  Ireland  in  1172  with  500  knights 
and  4,000  soldiers,  many  of  whom  settled 
in  that  country,  and,  amongst  others,  a 
number  of  English,  Norman  and  Welsh 
priests,  whose  morals  were  such  as  to  scan- 
dalize the  Irish  people  and  to  receive  the 
just  condemnation  of  numerous  Irish  his- 
torians. 

Waterford,  therefore,  at  the  time  when 
the  very  suspicious  skeleton  Synod  already 
mentioned,  is  supposed  to  have  been 
held,  was  the  hive  into  which  had  gathered 
the  greater  number  of  the  Irish-hating  ad- 
venturers who  had  followed  the  fortunes  of 
Strongbow  and  King  Henry  to  Ireland,  in 
order  to  improve  their  finances  by  filching 
the  lands  and  property  of  the  Irish  people  by 
means  of  force  of  arms,  forged  Bulls,  or  in 
any  other  iniquitous  manner  which  sug- 
gested itself  to  such  a  squad  of  piratical 
invaders. 

It  is  very  certain,  therefore,  that  if  any 
Synod  was  held  in  Waterford  during  any 
year  from  1171  to  1177,  very  likely  it  was 
composed  of  the  foreign  ecclesiastical  ele- 
ment which  had  colonized  there,  and  who 
were  ready  to  accept  any  document  pre- 
sented to  them  through  the  influential 
agents  of  King  Henry,  and  to  ask  no  ques. 
tions  as  to  its  genuine  character  or  its 
j  ustice. 

Those  writers  who  copy  from  hired  Ens.'- 
lish  historians,  repeat  the  romance  that  the 
bogus  Bull  of  Alexander  was  read  to  an  as- 
sembly of  "Bishops,"  but  these  "Bishops," 
we  may  safely  surmise,  were  merely  the 
foreign  ecclesiastics  who  are  thus  described 
in  Carew's  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Ireland : 

"  Of  the  English  Clergy  who  settled  in  this 
country,  there  were  many  whose  lives  were  a 
reproach  to  their  sacred  calling.  These,  we  are 
assured,  had  scarcely  taken  up  their  abode  in 
Ireland,  when  several  of  them  were  found  to 
live  in  the  violation  of  the  solemn  obligations 
which  are  annexed  to  the  Priesthood.  That, 


under  the  pretense  of  introducing  a  more  strict 
morality  into  Ireland,  the  country  should 
have  been  made  tributary  to  England,  was  in 
itself  sufficiently  mortifying  to  the  Irish  Clergy. 
But,  that  such  spiritual  instructors  as  had  been 
imported  by  the  invaders,  should  be  employed 
to  enlighten  the  piety  of  the  Irifh  people,  pro- 
voked their  utmost  indignation." 

With  such  ecclesiastical  material  as  these 
Anglo-Norman  and  Welsh  Priests  formed, 
King  Henry  would  have  no  trouble  what- 
ever in  molding  them  to  suit  his  views.  A 
Pope's  Bull,  without  date  or  location,  would 
be  approved  and  accepted  without  a  dis- 
senting voice,  especially  if — like  the  Alex- 
ander forgery — it  calumniated  the  Catholic 
Bishops,  Priests,  Religious  and  people  of 
Ireland,  by  designating  them  under  the 
diabolical  aspersion  of  being  "Christians 
only  in  name."  Even,  therefore,  supposing 
there  was  a  Synod  at  Waterford,  in  the 
twelfth  century,  there  is  no  proof  extant 
that  any  of  the  Irish  Bishops  assisted 
thereat,  and  a  Synod  in  which  the  Irish 
Bishops  took  no  part  would  be  nothing 
more  than  a  convention  of  unauthorized 
clerics  who  would  incur  excommunication 
for  their  contumacious  conduct  in  thus 
usurping  an  authority  solely  vested  in  the 
Irish  Prelates. 

It  is  said  by  English  writers  and  repeated 
by  their  American  imitators  in  the  pro- 
pagation of  falsehood,  that  the  bogus  Bulls 
were  seen  by  the  Irish  Bishops  and  accepted 
by  them  as  genuine.  Now,  if  such  were 
the  fact,  was  it  not  an  act  of  rank  disobe- 
dience to,  and  of  actual  rebellion  against,  the 
Holy  See,  for  each  of  those  twenty  or  thirty 
Bishops  then  in  Ireland,  to  live  and  die 
without  ever  once  asking  their  flocks  for  a 
single  penny  for  St.  Peter's  successor  ? 
Does  any  person  who  has  even  the  re- 
motest idea  of  the  ready  obedience  and  the 
scrupulous  punctiliousness  of  the  Irish 
Bishops,  in  carrying  out  the  provisions  of 
all  genuine  Bulls  received  by  them  from 
Rome,  harbor  for  an  instant  the  idea  that 
St.  Gelasius,  the  Primate  of  Armagh,  St. 
Laurence  O'Toole,  then  Archbishop  of 
Dublin,  and  all  the  other  saintly  Prelates 
who  at  that  period  presided  over  God's 
Church  in  Ireland,  would  rebel  against  the 
Roman  Pontiff  whom  they  had  sworn  to 
obey  in  all  things  just?  It  is  very  clear  to 


60 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


our  mind,  therefore,  that  no  Irish  Bishop 
believed  the  Adrian  Bull  to  be  genuine,  al- 
lowing even  that  any  of  them  saw  it,  and, 
if  we  had  no  other  evidence  of  the  spurious 
character  of  this  document,  the  scornful  and 
bcurvy  treatment  that  it  received  at  the 
hands  of  the  entire  Hierarchy  of  Ireland, 
would  satisfy  us  that  they  saw  through  the 
fraud  at  the  first  glance,  hence  they  paid 
no  attention  to  it. 

No  Bishops  in  the   world  were  more  in 
harmony  with  Rome  in  the  twelfth  century 
than  the  Irish  Prelates.     Popes  Adrian  and 
Alexander  were  personally  known  to  many 
of  them,  and  the  idea  that  not  a  single  one 
of  the  Bishops  would  obey  those  Pontiffs' 
demand  for  "a  penny  from  each  house  in 
Ireland,"  as  Peter-Pence,    is   a  statement 
so  contrary    to    the   saintly   obedience    of 
these  noble  successors   to    St.    Patrick   as 
to  cast  the  shadow  of  diabolical  calumny 
athwart    the     sacred     shrines     in     which 
their  blessed  ashes  repose  !     No  !    a  thou- 
sand times  No  !      The  Irish  Bishops  of  the 
twelfth  century  who  saw  the  bogus  Bulls, 
set  them  down  at  their  true  value  and — to 
a  man — they  silently  spurned   with  sacer- 
dotal scorn  the    spurious  documents— and 
may  God  increase  their  heavenly  happiness 
for  having  done  so  ! 


superficial  readers  of  Irish   history  so  often 
purposely   make   in   order  to  mislead  their 
dupes.       Dr.  Lingard  says  that  the  Adrian 
Bull  was  read  at  a  Synod  of  the  Irish  Bish- 
ops :  but  a  Synod  held  nn  where,  and  on  a 
day   in  a  month  and  year  not  designated, 
would  be  precisely  the  place  for  introducing 
a  forged  Bull  without  date,  and  issued  from 
Rome  by  a  Pope  who  was  not  permitted  to 
occupy  the  Eternal  City  during  the  fictitious 
year  attributed  to  the  fraudulent  document  ! 
The  fitness  of  the  bogus    Bull  and  the  boijus 
Synod,  will,  therefore,  be  both  apparent  as 
well  as  transparent  to  all  our  readers  ! 


The  next  witness  we  call  into  the  Superior 
Court  of  San  Francisco  in  order  to  convict 
its  Judge  of  a  very  serious  "mistake,"  is 
Dr.  John  Lingard,  the  eminent  historian, 
who,  speaking  of  the  first  introduction  of 
the  Adrian  fraud  into  Ireland,  says,  after 
alluding  to  King  Henry's  return  to  Eng- 
land : 

"It  was  during  this   period,   when   his  au- 
thority in  Ireland  was  nearly  annihilated,  that 
Henry  bethought  him  of  the  letter  which  he 
had  formerly  procured  from  Pope   Adrian.      I 
had  been  forgotten  during  almost  twenty  years 
now  it  WAS  drawn  from  obscurity,  was  intrusted 
to  William   Fit/.  Aldelm,   and  Nicholas,   Prior 
of  Wallingford,  and  was  read  by  them   with 
much  solemnity  to  a  Synod  of  Irish  Bishops." 

It  seems,  therefore,  from  Dr.  Lingard 's 
language,  that  Judge  Maguire's  assertion 
about  King  Henry  being  "  armed"  with 
double-barreled  Bulls,  when  he  set  out  for 
Ireland,  waa  one  of  those  "  mistakes"  which 


Another  fact  which  we  desire  to  impress 
upon  our  readers  in  connection  with 
this  very  suspicious  Synod  which  is  sup- 
posed to  have  been  held  in  Waterford,  is, 
that  from  the  time  of  St.  Patrick  (about  the 
year  456)  down  to  the  year  1175,  there  were 
a  great  number  of  National  Synods  held  in 
Ireland,  but  not  one  of  them  ever  assem- 
bled in  Waterford  !  Nor  is  there  any  ac- 
count in  Irish  history  of  any  such  Synod 
ever  being  held  in  that  locality  for  more 
than  a  hundred  years  thereafter,  t 

It  is  well  to  understand  that  so  few  Cath- 
olics were  there  in   Waterford  during  the 
six  centuries  intervening  between  the  years 
456  and   1096, '  that  the   See  of  Waterford 
had  no   existence.       This  is  another    evi- 
dence of  the  fact  that  Danes,  Scandinavians, 
Normans  and  people  from  other  portions  of 
Pagan  Europe,  must  have  predominated  in 
Waterford,    especially  when   we  have  his- 
torical proof  of  the  fact  that  twenty  Cath- 
olic  Sees  'were  formed  in  Ireland  between 
the  founding  of  the  Dioceses  of  Armagh, 
Clogher,   Meath,   Clonmacnoise,  Down  and 
Ardagh  in   the  fifth  century,   down  to  five 
hundred  years  thereafter,   when  a  See  was 
established   in   Waterford.      Thus  it  came 
about  that   Waterford   was  created  a  See 
only   about  seventy-five  years    before    the 
English  invasion,  and  six  hundred  and  forty 
years  after   the  See  of  Armagh.      It  is  not 
likely,  therefore,  that  not  only  St.  Gelasius, 
the  Irish  Primate,   was  absent  from  this 
very  suspicious  Synod,  but  that  every  other 
Irish  bishop  carefully  and  dutifully  made 

fCarew's  Ecclesiastical  History, 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


Cl 


themselves  absentees  from  such  an  assembly 
of  scandal-giving  English  and  Welsh  ec- 
clesiastics. 


Judge  Maguire  seems  to  imagine  that  he 
has  made  a  point  in  favor  of  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  Adrian  Bull,  by  copying  the  as- 
sertion of  a  writer  who  says  that  "  St.  Law- 
rence O'Toole,  and  other  leading  Bishops  of 
Ireland,  conversed  with  Pope  Alexander 
III.  about  the  Adrian  Bull  as  well  as  the 
reigning  Pontiffs  own  confirmatory  Bull," 
during  the  time  these  Irish  Prelates  were  in 
Rome  attending  the  Third  Lateran  Council 
in  1179. 

Admitting,  for  the  purpose  of  illustrating 
the  falsity  of  the  foregoing  statement,  that 
St.  Laurence  O'Toole  and  the  Irish  Bishops 
conversed  every  day  for  a  year  about  the 
two  Bulls  above  mentioned,  and  that  each 
Prelate  could  recite  every  word  of  these 
documents  from  memory,  we  claim  that  this 
very  fact,  so  far  from  proving  anything  in 
favor  of  the  authenticity  of  .the  Bulls  in 
question,  actually  helps  to  show  their  fraud- 
ulent nature,  thus  adding  another  link  to 
the  chain  we  are  making  in  order  to  de- 
monstrate their  spurious  character. 

Now  we  ask  any  reflecting  Catholic  to 
consider  this  phase  of  the  case  as  we  pre- 
sent it  from  a  Catholic  standpoint : 

Irish  Bishops  go  to  Rome  ;J  while  there 
two  Bulls  calling  for  an  annual  alms  of 
one  penny  from  every  house  in  Ireland,  as 
Peter-Pence  for  the  propagation  of  the 
Faith,  are  presented  to  them  by  one  of  the 
Pontiffs  who  is  said  to  have  issued  a  Bull  of 
his  own  in  confirmation  of  that  of  one  of  his 
predecessors.  The  Pope  lucidly  explains 
the  two  documents  to  the  Prelates ;  he 
points  out  the  Peter-Pence  clause  particu- 

JThere  were  six  Irish  Prelates  in  Rome  in 
attendance  at  the  Council  of  Lateran.  These 
are  said  to  have  been  St.  Laurence  of  Dublin, 
Catholicus  of  Tuam,  Constantino  O'Brien  of 
Killaloe,  Felix  of  L  is  ED  ore,  Augustine  of  Water- 
ford,  and  Brictius  of  Limerick.  Pope  Alex- 
ander III.,  bestowed  the  kindest  attention  on 
them  all,  taking  the  Church  of  Dublin  under 
under  his  own  special  protection  ;  confirmed  the 
jurisdiction  of  St.  Laurence  O'Toole  over  the 
Sees  of  Grlendaloch,  Kildare,  Ferns,  Leighlin 
and  Ossory ;  and  appointed  the  saintly  Metro- 
politan of  Dublin  tho  Legate  of  his  Holiness 
throughout  the  Kingdom  of  Ireland. — Carets 
Ecclesiastical  History. 


larly  ;  he  causes  certified  copies  to  be  made 
of  the  Bulls,    hands   them  to  the  Bishops  at 
their  departure  from  the  Eternal  City,  gives 
them  his  blessing,  and  bids  them  God- speed. 
St.    Laurence  O'Toole  and  his  Episcopal 
brethren  arrive  in  Ireland;  they  publicly  and 
privately  recite  their  experience  in  Rome 
during  the  Council,  and  particularly  allude 
to   their  frequent    conferences    with  Pope 
Alexander  III.,  on  the  two  Bulls  calling  for 
Peter-Pence  every  year,  and  yet,  not  one  of 
these  Bishops  ever  sent  to  Rome  a  single  penny 
in   response  to  the  double  request  for  Peter- 
Pence  made  by  Popes  Adrian  and  Alexan- 
der! 

Is  there  a  single  Catholic  on  the  face  of 
God's  footstool  who  will  charge  the  saintly 
St.  Laurence  O'Toole  and  the  other  Bishops 
of  Ireland  with  having  thus  heaped  insult 
and  injury  upon  Pope  Alexander  III.  and 
the  Holy  See  !  Yet  this  is  precisely  the 
unenviable  position  these  Prelates  must  in- 
evitably occupy  in  the  estimation  of  a  just 
public  opinion,  if  the  statement  in  Judge 
Maguire's  bad  book  is  to  be  credited. 

Laurence  O'Toole,  Archbishop  of  Dublin, 
was  canonized  and  is  duly  recognized  as  a 
great  Saint  in  the  Church  of  God,  but  if, 
during  the  process  of  the  proceedings  prior 
to  his  Canonization,  the  Devil's  Advocate 
had  adduced  evidence  to  prove  that  this 
holy  Prelate  had  been  disobedient,  insubor- 
dinate and  contumacious  towards  Popes 
Adrian  and  Alexander,  the  nimbus  of  can- 
onization would  never  have  encircled  his 
brow  ! 

It  is  worse  than  folly,  therefore,  for  Judge 
Maguire,  or  any  other  anti-Catholic  to  say 
that  any  Bishop  in  Ireland  ever  had  a 
conversation  with  any  Pope  upon  Bulls  that 
never  were  issued  by  the  Pontiffs  named, 
nor  were  ever  properly  registered  in  any 
official  record  of  evidence  belonging  to  the 
Church  of  Christ.  Pope  Alexander  never 
saw  them  ;  St.  Gelasius  never  saw  them  ; 
St.  Laurence  O'Toole  never  saw  them — 
either  in  the  Vatican  or  any  other  place 
within  the  walls  of  the  Eternal  City,  and 
thus  it  came  about  that  the  Irish  Prelates 
never  collected  a  single  cent  of  Peter- Pence 
as  laid  down  in  both  the  criminally -con- 
cocted bogus  Bulls  ! 


G2 


T1IK      POI'B      AND      IltELAND. 


CHAPTER      X. 

The  Synod  of  Windsor  Criticised.— King  Henry's  Treaty  with  the  King  of  Connaught. 
— Neither  the  Adrian  nor  the  Alexander  Bulls  Known  in  England  even  as  late  as 
the  Year  1175. — Cardinal  "Vivian's  Visit  to  Ireland. — The  Bight  of  Sanctuary  in 
Ireland. — More  of  Judge  Magnire's  Malignant  Mistakes  Melted  in  the  Crucible  of 
Historic  Truth. 


Now  that  we  have  clearly  shown  the 
aham  character  of  the  Waterford  Synod,  let 
ua  turn  to  the  Synod  of  Windsor,  in  order 
to  ascertain  the  fact  that— even  in  England 
— no  person  had  knowledge  of  any  Bulls 
from  Popes  Adrian  and  Alexander  relating 
to  England  and  Ireland,  down  to  the  year 
1175. 

According  to  the  Annals  of  Roger  de 
Hoveden,*  in  1175,  King  Henry  II.,  held  a 
Council  at  Windsor,  in  England,  at  which 
assisted  the  Archbishops  of  Tuam  and  Dub- 
lin, as  well  as  Cantordis,  Abbot  of  St.  Bran- 
dan  and  Master  Laurence,  Chancellor  of 
Roderic,  King  of  Connaught.  This  fact  in- 
troduces new  evidence  to  prove  that  the 
Bulls  of  Adrian  and  Alexander  were  not  in 
existence  in  1175,  although  one  is  dated  1156, 
and  the  other  forgery  1172. 

The  Council  of  Windsor  was  held  for  the 
purpose  of  making  a  treaty  of  peace  with 
Roderic  O'Connor,  King  of  Connaught,  on 
whose  behalf  the  Irish  Prelates  were  pres- 
ent. The  terms  which  bound  the  King  and 
Roderic  to  keep  the  peace,  help  to  elucidate 
the  fact  that  up  to  this  date  no  one  in  Eng- 
land or  Ireland  had  any  knowledge  of  the 
Bulls,  the  fradulent  character  of  which  we 
are  exposing.  Here  is  the  agreement  as 
printed  in  Leland's  History  of  Ireland, 
copied  from  the  Annals  of  Rymer  : 

Roderic,  on  bin  part,  consented  to  do  homage, 
and  pay  tribute,  as  liege-man  to  tbe  king  of 
England ;  on  which  conditions  he  was  allowed 
to  hold  the  kingdom  of  Connaught,  as  well  as 
his  other  lands  and  sovereignties  in  as  ample  a 
manner  as  he  had  enjoyed  them  before  the  ar- 
rival of  Henry  in  Ireland.  His  vassals  were  to 
hold  under  him  in  peace,  as  long  as  they  paid 
tribute,  and  continued  faithful  to  the  king  of 
England  ;  in  which  Roderic  was  to  enforce  their 

'An  English  historian  in  the  age  of  H»nry  II. 
He  was  born  at  York,  was  Court  Chaplain  to 
Henry  and  also  one  of  his  Majesty's  legal  ad- 
viaera.  He  wrote  annals  which  began  in  the 
year  731.  where  Bede  left  off.  and  continued  to 
the  third  year  of  King  John. 


due  obedience,  and  for  this  purpose  to  call  to 
his  assistance  the  English  government  if  neces- 
sary. The  annual  tribute  to  be  paid  was  every 
tenth  merchantable  hide,  as  well  from  Con- 
naught  as  the  reat  of  the  island,  excepting  those 
parts  under  the  immediate  dominion  of  the  king 
of  England  and  his  barons.  Dublin  with  its  ap- 
puitenances,  Meath  with  all  its  appurtenances, 
Wexford  and  all  hamster,  and  Waterford  with 
its  lands,  as  far  as  tn  Dungarvan  inclusive ;  in 
all  which  districts.  Roderic  was  not  to  inter- 
fere, nor  claim  any  power  or  authority.  The 
Irish,  who  had  fled  from  hence,  were  to  return, 
and  either  to  pay  their  tribute,  or  to  peiform 
the  services  required  by  their  tenures,  at  the 
option  of  th?ir  immediate  lords;  and  if  refrac- 
tory, Roderic,  at  the  requisition  of  their  lords, 
was  to  compel  them  to  return.  He  was  to  take 
hostages  from  his  vassels,  such  as  he  and  his 
liege  lords  should  think  proper ;  and  on  hia  part 
to  deliver  either  these  or  others  to  his  lord  as 
Henry  should  appoint  His  vassels  were  to 
furnish  hawks  and  hounds  annually  to  the  Eng- 
lish monarch,  and  were  not  to  detain  any  ten- 
ant of  his  immediate  demesne*  in  Ireland,  con- 
trary to  his  royal  pleasure  and  command. 

Here  we  find  an  agreement  by  the  condi- 
tions of  which  the  King  of  Connaught  re- 
tains his  kingdom.  "  as  well  as  his  sover- 
eignties and  other  lands  in  as  ample  a  man- 
ner as  he  had  enjoyed  them  before  the  ar- 
rival of  King  Henry  in  Ireland  !"  This  is 
certainly  a  very  singular  agreement  for 
King  Henry  to  make,  if — as  is  falsely  sup- 
posed— he  had  the  Adrian  Bull  in  his  pos- 
session !  King  Henry  exacts  from  Roderic 
an  annual  tribute  of  "every  tenth  mer- 
chantable hide"  for  himself,  but  he  never 
once  thinks  of  asking  Roderic  O'Connor  fcr 
that  "  penny  from  every  house"  collection 
for  the  Pope  who  gave  him  all  Ireland  for  a 
free  donation  !  Was  not  Henry  a  most  un- 
grateful wretch  ?  To  capture  every  tenth 
hide  and  to  leave  not  a  hair  for  the  Popes 
who  made  him  both  Pope  and  King  of  Ire- 
land !  Deeper  ingratitude  than  this  no 
man  ever  committed  !  But  was  it  in- 
gratitude ?  Or,  rather,  does  not  Henry'} 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


conduct  and  the  contents  of  his  agreement 
with  Roderic  O'Connor  clearly  prove  that 
the  English  King  had  not  a  scrap  of 
Adrian's  or  Alexander's  Bulls  among  his 
archives  even  as  late  as  1175  ! 

If  these  Bulls  existed,  both  the  English 
and  the  Irish  Prelates  present  at  the  Synod 
of   Windsor,    would    most    assuredly  have 
known  of  them,  and  have  alluded  to  them 
and  their  peculiar  Peter-Pence   clauses,  be- 
fore   closing  the   above   treaty    of    peace  ! 
King  Henry  would  certainly   have  alluded 
to  the  collection  of  Peter- Pence  (provided 
he  had  the  Popes'  authority  therefor)  when 
he  entered  into  a  treaty  with  Roderic  as 
King  of  Ireland.     The  Irish  Bishops,  too — 
had  they  an  inkling  of  any  Bulls  by  which 
the   Papal  treasury  was  entitled   to  certain 
specified  donations— could  not  do  otherwise 
than  to  see  that  such  a  clause  was  put  into 
the  treaty  of  peace  as  would  make  the  col- 
lection of   the  Peter-Pence  just  as  binding 
on  the  two  kings  as  Henry  made  the  obli- 
gation of  furnishing  "a  tenth  merchantable 
hide"  obligatory  upon  the  part  of  Roderic. 
This  is  very  clear,  and  these  circumstances 
cast  an  additional  shadow  of  doubt  over  the 
genuineness  of  both  the  apocryphal  Bulls  at- 
tributed to  Popes  Adrian  and  Alexander. 

Again,  if,  as  Cambrensis  and  his  copyists 
say,  there  was  a  Synod  of  Bishops  in  Cashel 
or  elsewhere  in  1172,  at  which  the  bogus 
Bulls  were  read  and  accepted  by  the  Irish 
Bishops,  would  not  the  Archbishop  of 
Tuam's  memory  have  carried  him  back 
three  years  prior  to  1175  and  revived  that 
fact? 

And  when  that  Prelate  read  and  signed  a 
treaty  of  peace  in  which  an  annual  tribute 
of  "  every  tenth  merchantable  hide"  was  to 
be  paid  to  King  Henry,  would  not  such  a 
proviso  prick  his  conscience  that  in  signing 
such  a  document  he  was  virtually  robbing 
Peter  of  his  pence  in  order  to  favor  a  for- 
eign prince  ? 

We  leave  every  intelligent  reader  to  an- 
swer these  questions  to  the  satisfaction  of 
his  own  reason,  but  for  ourself  we  can 
freely  say  that  no  Irish  Bishop  could  act  in 
the  fraudulent,  dishonest,  disrespectful  and 
degrading  manner  English  falsifying  his- 
torians chronicle,  simply  because  such  ne- 
farious actions  belong  to  the  lives  of  the 


scheming,  the  ambitious,  the  unscrupulous, 
and  the  irreligious,  but  not  to  the  saintly 
lives  of  the  humble,  pious,  virtuous  Apostles 
of  Almighty  God  who  ruled  over  His  Church 
in  Ireland  in  every  century  from  the  fifth 
to  the  nineteenth ! 

The  Irish  Bishops,  like  the  Round  Towers 
of  that  holy  land,  stand  as  monuments  of 
the  Faith  in  an  island  where  Christianity 
took  root  as  spontaneously  in  the  hearts  of 
the  people,  as  did  the  shamrock  in  its  na- 
tive soil !  More  loyal  men  to  Faith,  truth, 
justice  and  honor  than  the  Bishops  of  Ireland 
never  lived  !  And  to  falsely  charge  these 
Prelates  with  double  hypocrisy  towards  the 
Vicar  of  Christ  on  one  hand,  and  against 
King  Henry  on  the  other,  is  to  charge  the 
very  sun  in  the  heavens  with  giving  forth 
no  light  ! 

It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  no  Synod  of 
Irish  Bishops  ever  saw  the  bogus  Bulls,  nor 
did  Henry  the  Second  issue  his  order  to 
have  them  forged  and  fraudulently  signed 
even  as  late  as  the  year  1175. 


Let  us  now   carry   our  readers  back  to 
Dublin,  where,   as  some   historians  assert, 
and  some  copyists  repeat,  a  Synod  was  sum- 
moned in  the  year  1177,  by,  and  immediate- 
ly held  under  Vivian,  the  Pope's  Legate 
to  Ireland.      Judge  Maguire,  copying  from 
Carew,    who    copied    from    Lanigan,    who 
copied  from  the  falsifying  calumniator  Cam- 
brensis, says  "  the  Legate  set  forth  Henry's 
right   to    the    sovereignity    of   Ireland,  in 
virtue   of  the  Pope's  authority,  and  incul- 
cated the  necessity  of  obeying  him  under 
pain  of  excommunication."      The  inventor 
of  this  falsehood  was  Cambrensis,  and  every 
reader  of  these    lines  already  knows  what 
reliance    can  be  placed  upon   any  expres- 
sion of  that  publicly-convicted   perverter  of 
each  truth,  fact  and  circumstance  his  pen 
ever  treated  of.     Cambrensis  says  that  Car- 
dinal Vivian   proclaimed  publicly  (but  ver- 
bally) in  the  Dublin  Synod,  the  right  of  the 
King  of  England  over  Ireland,  and  the  con- 
firmation  of   Pope   Alexander,    "with  the 
rigorous  precept,   both  to  the  clergy  and 
people,  to  remain  faithful  to  the  King,  un- 
der pain  of  excommunication." 

In  regard   to  this  assertion,  as  well  as  to 
all  others  made   by   Cambrensis,  it  is  clear 


'    ! 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


that  it  will  not  stand  the  test  or  critical 
scrutiny.  The  Council  of  Dublin  could  not 
have  been  attended  by  any  Irish  clergy  out- 
side the  English  Pale,  as  Cambrensis  him- 
self tells  us  that  during  the  same  year  in 
which  the  Dublin  Council  was  held  (1177) 
the  entire  Provinces  of  Ulster  and  Con- 
naught  remained  iniccetsible  tv  the  English, 
whose  attacks  the  natives  constantly  re- 
pelled. It  is  safe  to  say,  therefore,  that  not 
one-half  of  the  clergy  of  Ireland  attended 
the  Dublin  Synod. 

When,  therefore,  Cambrensis  says  that  a 
verbal  proclamation  of  excommunication 
against  the  whole  Episcopate,  the  clergy  and 
people  of  Ireland,  was  made  by  Cardinal 
Vivian,  that  untruthful  scribe  fairly  outdoes 
himself  as  the  champion  historical  falsier  of 
the  twelfth  century  !  There  is  not  a  single 
word  of  truth  in  that  part  of  his  statement 
concerning  Cardinal  Vivian  or  the  threat  of 
excommunication  !  And  now  for  the  proof: 
Leaving  aside  altogether  every  copyist  of 
Cambrensis — from  the  mercenary  Giraldua 
himself  down  to  the  malignant  Maguire— 
let  us  take  up  the  ancient  Chronicles  writ- 
ten by  men  who  were  not  hired  to  calum- 
niate the  Catholic  Church,  nor  whose  hate 
against  the  Pope  was  not  so  malignant  as  to 
lead  them  into  the  filthy  habit  of  picking  up 
every  scrap  of  rotten  rubbish  which  they 
found  floating  along  the  scum  of  libellous 
literature  flowing  from  the  foulest  sources  of 
English  bigots— for  no  other  purpose  than 
to  cause  a  separation  between  the  Vicar  of 
Christ  and  the  children  of  St.  Patrick. 

When  hottest  men  desire  to  investigate 
the  dogmas  of  the  Catholic  Church,  for  the 
purpose  of  learning  the  truth  concerning 
them,  they  do  not  consult  the  works  of  anti- 
Catholic  writers  whose  prejudices  preclude 
the  possibility  of  truth  having  any  existence 
in  their  mental  regions.  In  like  manner, 
when  any  honest  investigator  of  Irish  events 
desires  to  learn  the  truth  concerning  them, 
he  does  not  consult  the  works  of  Ireland's 
worst  enemies  (as  Judge  Maguire  does)  in 
order  to  blacken  the  character  of  the  Cath- 
olic Church  and  to  justify  his  own  Judas- 
like  apostacy. 

Now  let  us  open  the  Annals  of  Ireland, 
written  by  Irishmen,  and  see  how  far  they 
will  assist  in  convicting  Judge  Maguire  of 


another  of  those  "  mistakes"  which  are 
prompted  by  his  an ti- Papal  prejudices  and 
vitalized  by  his  vicious  attack  upon  the 
Church  of  his  holy  Irish  ancestors. 

The  ancient  annals  of  Ireland  mention 
the  arrival  in  that  country  of  a  Cardinal 
Vivianus,  (or  Vivian  as  it  is  abridged  by  re- 
cent writers).  This  Legate  of  the  Pope  is 
recorded  as  having  arrived  in  Ireland  in 
1177.  Under  that  date  we  6nd,  in  the 
Annals  of  Dublin,  the  following  : 

"Cardinal  Vivianu?  came  to  Ireland,  and 
convened  a  Synod  of  Irish  Bishops  and  Abbots 
at  Dublin,  on  the  first  Sunday  in  Lent,  at  which 
they  enacted  many  ecclesiastical  regulations,  "f 

The  Chronicles  of  the  Four  Masters  say  : 
"  In  the  year  1177  Cardinal  Vivian  arrived  in 
Ireland.  A  Council  of  the  whole  Irish  clergy, 
with  its  Bishops  and  Abbots  was  assembled  by 
the  Cardinal  on  the  first  Saturday  of  Lent ;  he 
promulgated  several  ordinances  which  now  are 
not  known.  "£ 

Even  if  we  had  no  other  evidence  to 
offer,  these  two  extracts  are  sufficient  to 
prove  that  the  Synod  of  the  Irish  Bishops, 
clergy  and  people  was  never — in  1177  or  at 
any  other  time — threatened  with  excom- 
munication by  any  Pope  if  they  refused  to 
remain  faithful  to  the  King  of  England. 
In  the  first  place  the  crime  (if  crime  it  was  f) 
and  the  punishment,  are  opposed  in  fact  and 
essence  to  the  ever  just  laws  of  God  and  of 
His  Church.  Threaten  with  excommuni- 
cation Bishops,  Priests  and  millions  of  peo- 
ple, if  ever  they  were  unfaithful  to  a  foreign 
invader  who  was  a  murderer,  a  robber  and 
a  sacriligious  violator  of  God's  consecrated 
sanctuaries  ?  Is  there  a  single  sane  person 
whose  mind  is  acquainted  with  even  the  ele- 
mentary principles  of  God's  justice,  the  in- 
tegrity of  the  Holy  See,  and  the  code  of 
Canon  Law,  who  harbors  the  thought  for  an 
instant  that  such  a  transaction  ever  trans- 
pired ? 


Now  let  us  apply  the  rules  of  Catholic 
justice  to  the  Dublin  Synod,  and  see  how 
far  they  prove  that  Cardinal  Vivian  could 
not  act  in  the  manner  that  Cambrensis 
states. 

Giraldus  says  of  the  Pope's  Legate  that 

tlrish  Miscellany,  VoL  L,  pp.  195. 
^Quoted  by  Cambrennis,    Vol.  V.  pp.  345. 


THE      POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


C5 


when  he  called  the  Ecclesiastical  Council  of 
Dublin,  he  announced  publicly  (but  verbal- 
ly, be  it  borne  in  mind)  the  right  of  the 
King  of  England  to  rule  over  Ireland,  and 
the  confirmation  of  Pope  Alexander,  with 
the  unusual  and  extraordinary  penalty 
against  all  the  Bishops,  the  Clergy  and  the 
people  of  Ireland,  to  remain  faithful  to  the 
English  King  under  pain  of  anattiema.  § 

This  assertion  may  be  all  right,  coming  as 
it  does  from  Cambrensis,  who  could  scarce- 
ly tell  the  truth  even  by  accident,  but  when 
it  is  weighed  and  measured  by  the  scale  of 
Canon  law,  and  long-established  custom  in 
the  Catholic  Church,  it  immediately  (if  we 
may  be  permitted  to  imitate  King  Henry, 
and  fabricate  a  Evil)  weighs  nothing  and 
measures  less  ! 

Rome  has  certain  laws  by  which  all  docu- 
ments emanating  from  the  Vatican  are 
brought  to  the  notice  of  those  who  come 
under  their  provisions  and  upon  whom  they 
are  binding.  But  no  one  will  pretend  to 
say  that  in  the  Code  of  the  Catholic  Church 
there  is  any  enactment  by  which  even  Car- 
dinal Vivian  would  be  justified  in  making  a 
vprbal  announcement  of  a  Bull  to  a  few  of 
the  Irish  Bishops,  and  then  threaten  the 
whole  Episcopate,  clergy  and  people  of  Ire- 
land with  the  vengeance  of  anathema — if 
they  were  disloyal  to  the  English  King. 

Rome  does  not  disseminate  her  Bulls  after 
any  such  loose  fashion,  nor  does  she  expect 
that  they  will  be  propagated  by  word  of 
month,  or  obeyed  by  Prelates  and  people 
who  know  their  contents  only  by  hea-rsay. 
Rome  never  countenances  an  injustice 
against  her  children,  nor  does  she  expect 
obedience  in  anything  impossible. 

In  1177  neither  the  Province  of  Ulster 
nor  Connaught  were  embraced  in  that  por- 
tion of  Ireland  invaded  by  King  Henry. 

§Few  persons  have  a  clear  comprehension  of 
the  awful  spiritual  punishment  which  is  com- 
prised within  the  simple  word  "anathema." 
Anathema  is  rarely  pronounced,  but  when  pro- 
mulgated it  is  conducted  with  far  more  imposing 
ceremonies  than  excommunication,  in  order  to 
strike  terror  into  the  hearts  of  the  culprits  and 
to  bring  them  back  to  repentance.  The  cere- 
mony is  performed  by  a  Bishop  and  twelve 
priests,  who  hold  lighted  candles  in  their  hands, 
which,  after  prescribed  prayers,  they  cast  upon 
the  earth,  and  trample  upon  them  the  moment 
the  awful  sentence  is  pronounced,  uttering  male- 
edictions  and  execrations  against  the  guilty  par- 
ti ea. -Leg.  13:  Fit.  9.  p.  1. 


And  for  this  reason  we  are  safe  in  asserting 
that  no  Bishop,  Priest,  Monk  of  Friar  out- 
side the  English  Pale,  ever  set  foot  in  the 
Synod  of  Dublin. 


The  English  chronicler  Hoveden  speaks 
of  Cardinal  Vivian,  and  his  journey  to  Ire- 
land in  1177,  but  he  says  not  a  word  about 
any  Synod  at  Dublin  or  anywhere  else  in 
Ireland  during  that  year.  Here  is  what  his 
chronicles  say  on  that  subject : 

"The  same  year  (1176)  Vivian,  Cardinal- 
Priest  of  the  title  of  St  Stephen  on  the  Cecilian 
Mount,  Legate  of  the  Apostolic  See,  passed  the 
Christmas  in  the  Isle  of  Man,  with  King 
Guthred.  After  the  Feast  of  the  Epiphany 
(1177)  he  set  Rail  for  Ireland  and  landed  at  I  >m 
in  Alvestre.1I  As  he  was  going  to  Dublin,  by 
the  shore,  he  met  the  army  of  John  de  Curci, 
by  whom  he  was  arrested  and  detained,  but 
when  his  ecclesiastical  character  was  revealed 
he  was  released. 

"  John  de  Curci  laid  seige  to  and  captured 
Dun,  i  the  chief  city  of  Alvestre,*  where  repose 
the  bodies  of  the  holy  Confessors,  Patrick  and 
Columba,  at  well  as  the  body  of  St.  Bridget, 
Virgin.  Roderick,  King  of  Alvestre.^T  on  hear- 
ing this,  collected  a  large  body  of  Irishmen  and 
gave  battle  to  John  de  Curci,  but  the  latter  was 
victorious.  The  Bishop  of  Dun||  was  captured 
in  the  combat,  but  subsequently  liberated  at  the 
entreaty  of  the  Cardinal." 

When  the  Pope's  Legate  had  procured 
the  best  terms  he  could  for  the  defeated 
Irish,  he  proceeded  to  Dublin,  where— as 
the  Nun  of  Kenmare  says— "he  held  a 
Synod.  The  principal  enactment  referred 
to  the  right  of  sanctuary."  The  Nun  says 
nothing  about  any  excommunication  for  a 
crime  not  committed,  and  thus  Judge  Ma 
guire's  witness  gives  evidence  for  the  Pope 
and  against  the  English  Cambrensis  and  his 
California  imitator  ! 


ARCHBISHOP  COMYN'S  CHARACTER. 

In  his  attempts  at  exposing  what  he  calls 
"  Humiliating  the  Irish  priests  and  people 
and  Papal  interference  with  Irish  struggles 
for  liberty  after  the  Conquest,"  Judge  Ma- 
guire  is  just  as  inaccurate  as  he  is  in  every 
other  portion  of  his  bad  book.  His  honor 
must  have  had  a  bad  attack  of  anti-Catholic 

HDownpatrick. 

HUlster. 


66 


THE      POPE      AND      IBELAND. 


rabiea  when  he  wrote  the  following  foolish 
fusillade  of  fanatical  hate  : 

"In  the  year  1180  King  Henry,  who  persecuted 
the  Holy  Prelate,  St.  Laurence,  fur  his  ardent 
attachment  to  the  land  of  his  birth,  resolved 
that  an  office  of  BO  much  importat.ee  (Ihe  Arch- 
bishopric of  Dublin)  should  not  be  entrusted  to 
an  Irishman.  *  *  *  Accordingly  on  the 
monarch's  recommendation,  his  chaplain,  Jodn 
Coinyn,  a  native  of  England,  was  elected  to  tl.e 
Archbishopric  of  Dublin,  by  some  of  the  clergy 
who  had  assembled  at  Evesham  foi  that  purpose. 
John  vxu  not  then  a  priest,  but  was  in  the  fol. 
lowing  year  ordained,  aud  was  consecrated  1  y 
Pope  Lucius  III." 

After  reading  the  foregoing  paragraph, 
Catholics  will  naturally  conclude  that  Judge 
Maguire  has  a  very  small  stock  of  Catholic 
knowledge,  inasmuch  as  he  tells  his  readers 
that  John  Coinyn  was  chaplain  to  Henry 
II. ,  but  was  not  ordained!  Was  ever  man 
in  buch  a  dual  position  ?  A  priest  and  a 
layman  at  the  same  time !  Now  the  truih 
of  the  circumstance  is  that  John  Coinyn, 
("  Cumyn,"  or  "Cummin  "as  it  is  variously 
written  by  Irish  historians)  was  a  good  Irish 
Prelate,  although  an  Englishman  by  birth. 
Here  is  what  Judge  Maguire's  favorite  au- 
thor, the  Nun  of  Kemnare,  says  of  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Dublin  : 

"The  English  Archbishop  resented  the 
wrongs  of  the  Irish  Church  as  personal  injuries, 
and  devoted  himself  to  its  advancement  as  a  per- 
sonal interest.  We  are  indebted  to  Archbisop 
Comyn  for  building  St.  Patrick's  Cathedral  in 
Dublin,  as  well  as  for  his  steady  efforts  to  pro- 
mitte  the  tctffare  of  the  nation."= 

Judge  Maguire  seems  to  think  Henry  did 
a  most  iniquitous  deed  when  he  sent  John 
Comyn  to  Dublin,  but  if  the  English  mon- 
arch never  did  anything  worse,  the  Irish 
people  would  have  little  cause  to  censure 
him.  John  Comyn,  when  selected  for  the 
See  of  Dublin  was  not  a  chaplain  to 
Henry  II.,  but  one  of  his  secretaries.  He 
was  an  eloquent  and  learned  layman.0 
The  election  took  place  in  the  monastery  at 
Eveaham,  where  ihe  clergy  of  Dublin  elected 
him,  September  6th,  1181.  The  candidate 
proceeded  to  Italy,  studied  theology,  was 
ordained  Priest,  and  subsequently  conse- 
crated Archbishop  at  Veletri,  by  Pope 

"McGeoghegan. 

-  The  Patriot's  History  of  Ireland. 


Lucius  III.,  as  the  successor  of  St.  Laurence 
O'Toole,  in  the  See  of  Dublin.  Now,  what 
is  wrong  about  all  that  ?  Assuredly  Pope 
Lucius  knew  fully  as  much  about  the  needs 
of  the  Catholic  Church  in  Ireland  in  the 
twelfth  century,  as  Judge  Maguire  thinks  Ite 
dues  in  the  nineteenth  century  !  But  his 
Honor  thought  he  would  make  a  point 
against  the  Pope  and  so— as  usual — he  put 
his  own  foot  in  the  hole  he  dug  for  his  Holi- 


In  order  to  create  and  foster  animosity 
against  the  Pope,  Judge  Maguire  says  that 
the  British  Government  has  generally  dic- 
tated the  appointment  of  most  of  the  Cath- 
olic Archbishops  and  Bishops  of  Ireland. 
While  this  is  not  exactly  true,  except  in 
some  special  cases,  it  by  no  means  follows 
that  the  Archbishops  and  Bishops  so  selected 
were  not  true  to  Ireland.  To  a  man  they 
were  with  their  people  in  every  laudable  and 
Christian  effort  which  was  made  to  benefit 
Erin.  These  Bishops  did  not  believe  as 
Judge  Maguire  seems  to  imagine,  that  a 
man's  patriotism  is  promoted  by  his  apos- 
tacy,  nor  did  they  suspect  that  the  best  way 
to  serve  Ireland  was  to  curse  the  Pope.  On 
the  contrary,  these  holy  Prelates  guided 
their  flocks  on  the  lines  of  Christian  law 
and  human  justice  in  their  struggles  for 
freedom,  and,  when  the  sword  was  invoked, 
the  Irish  Prelates  blessed  the  green  banners 
of  the  brave  Irish  patriots  ! 


CONCERNING  THE  RIGHT  OF  SANCTUARY. 

On  the  twenty-fifth  page  of  Judge  Ma- 
guire's bad  book,  we  read  this  malignant 
and  monstrous  concoction  of  calumny  and 
anti-Catholic  hatred  combined : 

"  Until  that  time  (1177)  the  Catholic  churches 
were  inviolable  sanctuaries  into  which  the 
hunted  people  might  flee,  and  in  which  their 
lives  were  safe  from  murder  and  their  property 
from  spoliation.  At  this  Synod  of  Dublin,  the 
Pope  through  his  Legate  made  Ireland  an  ex- 
ception to  this  rule,  and  gave  leave  to  the  Eng- 
lish soldiers  to  enter  the  churches  and  strip  the 
people  of  the  food  brought  there  for  safety. 
Since  these  things  were  done  by  the  Vicar  of 
Christ  how  terrible  to  contemplate  what  the 
Vicar  of  Hell  would  have  done  under  similar 
circumstances." 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


G7 


To  the  closing  sentence  of  the  above  dia- 
bolical diatribe  we  may  justly  reply  :  When 
such  sentiments  are  the  product  of  Judge 
Maguire's  mind,  the  Vicar  of  Hell  must 
have  gained  full  possession  of  that  mental 
region  from  which  the  Vicar  of  Christ  has 
been  ruthlessly  evicted  ! 

Concerning  the  first  portion  of  Judge  Ma- 
guire's malignant  aspersion  upon  the  Pope's 
Legate  we  are  happy  to  state  that  it  is  about 
as  mean  a  piece  of  pettifogging  as  ever  was 
perpetrated.  Now  for  the  facts  and  the 
historical  proofs  of  our  assertion. 

The  first  witness  whom  we  shall  intro- 
duce in  order  to  convict  Judge  Maguire  of 
not  telling  "  the  whole  truth,"  is  no  less  a 
personage  than  the  Nun  of  Kenmare,  who 
says : 

"  Cardinal  Vivian  now  proceeded  to  Dublin, 
where  he  held  a  Synod.  The  principal  enact- 
ment related  to  the  right  of  sanctuary.  During 
the  Anglo-Norman  wars,  the  Irish  had  secured 
their  provisions  in  the  churches  ;  and,  it  is  said, 
that  in  order  to  starve  out  the  enemy,  they  even 
refused  to  sell  at  any  price.  It  was  now  decreed 
that  sanctuary  might  be  violated  to  obtain  food ; 
but  a  fair  price  was  to  be  paid  for  whatever  was 
taken."** 

With  this  paragraph  staring  him  in  the 

face,  Judge  Maguire  mendaciously  kept  back 

.  the  truth  in  order  to  stab  the  Pope  and  to 

draw  down  the  maledictions  of  evil-minded 

**H5story  of  Ireland,  pp.  287. 


men  upon  the  Church  of  Christ  !  Since 
such  things  are  done  by  Judge  Maguire,  the 
Vicar  of  Hell  must  indeed  have  made  the 
Satanic  suggestion ! 

Moreover,  Judge  Maguire  accuses  the 
Pope  and  Cardinal  Vivian  with  having  made 
this  rule,  when  the  fact  is  it  was  the  Irish 
Bishops  themselves  who  voted  it  int o  existence  / 
No  Pope,  no  Legate,  no  power  on  earth 
could  coerce  a  Synod  of  Bishops  (in  Ireland 
or  anywhere  else)  into  adopting  domestic 
rules  during  the  existence  of  warfare,  with- 
out the  consent  of  those  most  interested. 
The  matter  rested  in  the  hands  of  the  Irish 
Bishops.  If  they  had  voted  the  matter 
down  no  such  regulation  could  have  been 
made,  but  when  they— in  Synod  assembled 
— determined  by  their  votes  that,  during 
the  continuation  of  hostilities,  provisions 
should  be  furnished  to  those  who  paid  for 
them,  it  was  solely  the  act  of  the  Bishops, 
with  which  neither  Cardinal  Vivian  nor 
Pope  Alexander  III.  had  anything  whatever 
to  do. 

The  conclusion  every  candid- minded  read- 
er must  come  to  in  regard  to  this  point,  there- 
fore, is  that  Judge  Maguire  is  again  con- 
victed of  another  "mistake"  in  which  he  is 
caught  purposely  keeping  back  a  fact  which 
changes  the  entire  face  of  the  charge  he  so 
disreputably  fabricated  against  the  Church 
of  his  former  Faith  but  now  the  victim  gf 
his  virulent  calumny. 


r>8 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


CHAPTER    XI. 

Strong  Evidence  of  Euglish  Chroniclers,  Irish  Historians  and  other  Writers  from  the 
Twelfth  to  tin-  Nineteenth  Centuries  against  the  Authenticity  of  the  Adrian  Bull. 


Among  the  numerous  proofs  of  the 
spurious  character  of  the  Bull  attributed  to 
Pope  Adrian  IV.,  by  which  that  Pontiff 
was  supposed  to  have  donated  Ireland  to 
King  Henry  II.  of  England,  the  fact  that 
the  forged  document  first  made  its  appear- 
ance in  a  work  written  by  the  notorious 
falsifier  OSiraldusCambrensis,  is  not  the  least 
worthy  of  consideration.  The  despicable 
character  of  that  untruthful  and  unreliable 
hirelingof  Henry  II.  which  even  the  Protest- 
ant editors  of  his  works  acknowledge,  make 
it  entirely  unnecessary  on  our  part  t-i  parti- 
cularize the  many  disqualifications  which  a 
man  who  "  could  tell  the  truth  only  by  ac- 
cident" possessed  for  writing  a  history  of 
the  Irish  people,  and  the  great  doubt  with 
which  every  statement  of  his  should  be 
received  by  the  reasoning  public  of  any  cen- 
tury from  the  time  of  his  existence  down 
to  the  end  of  time. 

The  Adrian  Bull  is  supposed  by  some 
writers  to  have  been  issued  about  the  year 
1151,  others  guess  at  the  date  of  this  gross 
fraud  anywhere  about  or  between  the  years 
1152  to  1166. 

Now  if  this  Bull  were  a  genuine  docu- 
ment, there  would  be  no  trouble  whatever  in 
settling  not  only  the  exact  year  of  its  issu- 
ance, but  also  the  very  day,  month  and 
place  when  and  where  it  was  sealed  with  the 
Bnlla  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.  It  is  clear, 
therefore,  that  when  those  English  and  anti- 
Catholic  American  writers  whose  interest  it 
is  to  support  the  genuineness  of  the  Bull  in 
question,  fail  to  prove  with  certitude  the 
day,  month  and  year  when  it  was  issued,  as 
well  as  the  city  from  whence  Pope  Adrian 
promulgated  it—there  is  truly  a  mountain 
of  doubt  erected  as  a  mausoleum  over  this 
document  which  should  bury  it  forever 
among  the  rotten  rubbish  where  repose  all 
similarly  spurious  Papal  instruments. 


we  have  already  shown— the  authenticity  of 
the   Adrian   Bull   was  publicly  challenged. 
And  right  here  the  question  naturally  arises  : 
Why  did  not  King  Henry  If.,  or  Cambren- 
sis— who   were  each  personally  responsible 
for   its    production    and    publication — take 
means  to  prove  its  authenticity  at  that  early 
period  ?      A  simple  letter  sent  to  the  Sov- 
ereign  Pontiff    would    have    dispelled    all 
doubts  regarding  the   document  and  set  at 
rest  for  ever  all  contention  as  to  its  authen- 
ticity.      But   when   we   find   King   Henry 
and  his  obsequious  hireling  historian,  both 
possessing  a  full  knowledge  of  the  disbelief 
of  many  readers  of   the    Cambrensian  work 
in   which   the  fictitious   document  first  ap- 
peared, and  yet  not  making  a  single  effort 
to  disabuse  the  public  mind  of  all  doubt — 
then,  indeed,   it  is   reasonable  to  conclude 
that  they  were  cognizant  of  the  spurious 
character  of  the   document,  and,  further 
more,  that  they  did  not  desire  to  apply  any 
test  that  would  reveal  their  rascality. 


Even    in  the  lifetime  of  Cambrensis  —  as 


Another  suspicious  feature  about  the 
fraudulent  Adrian  Bull  arises  from  the  fact 
that  it  is  found  to  be  mentioned  in  the 
works  of  only  a  couple  of  early  English 
Chroniclers  alone.  And  now  let  us  trace 
this  Bull  down  the  course  of  time,  from  the 
twelfth  to  the  nineteenth  century,  and  learn 
from  the  evidence  of  reliable  annalists, 
Irish  historians,  and  other  reputable  writ- 
ers how  much  credence  they  placed  in  that 
English-made  Roman  document. 

THK    EVIDENCE    OF    BARONIUS. 

Cardinal  Baronius,  the  celebrated  official 
compiler  of  the  Pontifical  Annals  of  Rome, 
who  flourished  in  the  sixteenth  century,  and 
whose  Ecclesiastical  Annals  include  the 
twelfth  century,  does  not  mention  the  name 
of  King  Henry  If.,  of  England  in  connec- 
tion with  any  Bull  issued  under  the  signa- 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


69 


ture  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  by  which  a  dona- 
tion of  Ireland  was  made  to  that  English 
monarch. 

To  any  person  who  is  acquainted  with  the 
careful  fidelity  with  which  Baronius  notes 
every  important  act  of  each  Pope  of  Rome, 
in  his  official  records,  the  omission  we 
have  mentioned  will  be  considered  fatal, 
and  will  close  all  further  controversy  on  the 
subject.  . 

In  his  annals  for  the  year  1150,  Baronius 
makes  record  of  the  death  of  Pope  Adrian  ; 
then  he  gives  a  lengthy  biographical  sketch 
of  the  deceased  Pontiffs  life,  noting  with 
great  minuteness  the  principal  events  in 
which  he  was  prominent  during  his  Ponti- 
ficate. These  events  having  all  been  de- 
tailed, Baronius — in  order  that  his  Annals 
might  not  lack  completion— makes  this  ad- 
dendum : 

"  In  order  to  leave  out  nothing  which  may 
have  reference  to  the  memory  of  so  great  a  Pon- 
tiff, he  desires  to  quote,  according  to  a  manu- 
script of  the  Vatican,*  a  diploma  given  to 
Henry,  King  of  England,  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
establishing  religion  in  Ireland ;  but  in  what  year 
of  the  Pontificate  of  Adrian  ^he  diploma  was  given 
is  uncertain." 

More  "  uncertainty"  regarding  the  date 
of  this  remarkably  doubtful  diploma  ! 
When  there  is  any  "  uncertainty"  about  the 
date  of  as  highly  important  a  document  as  a 
Papal  Bull ;  when  the  year  in  which  it  was 
issued  is  not  known;  and  when  the  sus- 
picious document  is  said  to  have  issued  from 
Rome,  at  a  time  when  the  Pontiff  to  whom 
it  is  attributed,  was  not  in  lhat  city,  the 
document  is  at  once  stamped  "  spurious"  by 
virtue  of  these  shortcomings  ! 

Rome  is  most  severely  critical  in  her 
scrutiny  of  official  Papal  documents,  and  if 
there  is  the  least  doubt  concerning  any 
Bull,  Brief,  Concordat,  or  other  ecclesias- 
tical or  diplomatic  epistle,  »  Council  of  the 
most  erudite  Cardinals  is  called,  and  upon 
their  decision  the  document  is  adopted  or 
condemned,  according  as  the  evidence  may 
justify. 

Baronius  clearly  doubted  the  genuineness 

*It  was  the  Chronicle  of  Mathew  of  Paris,  an 
Englishman  who  flourished  in  the  13'h  century, 
which  was  smuggled  into  the  Vatican,  and  of 
whom  Lingard  says  but  little  credit  is  due,  be- 
cause "his  narrations  abound  with  errors." 


of  the  Adrian  "diploma,"  for  the  potent 
reason  that  he  could  not  discover  the  year, 
the  day,  nor  the  place  of  its  issuance,  and 
with  such  a  skilled  compiler  of  ecclesiastical 
records  as  Baronius,  such  omissions  cause 
all  documents  in  which  they  occur  to  be 
classed  among  those  looked  upon  as  apocry- 
phal. 

No  annalist  expresses  himself  more  per- 
spicuously than  Baronius  whenever  there 
is  question  of  the  authenticity  of  any  docu- 
ment upon  which  there  is  no  doubt.  But 
by  affirming  the  absence  of  any  date,  in 
the  present  instance,  Baronius  flatly  con- 
tradicts every  English  and  Irish  author  who 
pretends  to  fix  a  year  to  this  "doctored" 
diploma,  which,  as  Baronius  cautiously 
remarks,  was  not  a  "  Bull,"  but  merely  a 
"document"  which  he  found  among  some 
other  unimportant  papers  in  the  Vatican 
Archives.  This  document  says  nothing 
about  any  "donation"  of  Ireland  to  King 
Henry  ![.,  it  being  issued  entirely,  as 
Baronius  says,  "for  the  purpose  of  re-estab- 
lishing religion  in  Ireland." 

Doubtless  the  paper  found  by  Baronius 
was  a  transcript  of  the  spurious  "  Bull" 
which  was  concocted  to  order  for  King 
Henry  in  England,  and  a  copy  of  which  was 
surreptitiously  introduced  among  the  Vati- 
can manuscripts .  so  as  to  give  the  color  of 
authenticity  to  the  original  which  King 
Henry  kept  carefully  concealed  from  public 
gaze  in  the  secret  archives  of  Winchester 
castle. 


EVIDENCE    OF    BZOVIUS. 

Bzovius,  a  Polish  Dominican,  examined 
authoritatively  the  Archives  of  the  Vatican, 
and  published  different  works,  besides  con- 
tinuing the  A  unals  of  Baronius.  t  Although 
his  predecessor  in  recording  the  Vatican 
chronicles  alludes  in  a  peculiar  way  to  "a 
document"  in  which  King  Henry's  name  is 
mentioned,  Bzovius  is  entirely  silent  con- 
cerning it.  He  quotes,  however,  John  of 
Salisbury,  gives  three  extracts  from  the 
Polycraticus,  but  he  altogether  ignores  the 
Metalogicus  and  the  donation  of  Ireland. 

fThe  first  volume  of  bis  continuation  of  the 
Annals  of  Barjnius  appeared  in  the  year  1615 
and  was  dedicated  to  Pope  Paul  V. 


70 


THE       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


li:»        \MIKNT     i  IIUOXH-LK8     AND 
BIOORAPUKKS. 

It  is  a  very  remarkable  fact,  and  one  not 
to  be  easily  forgotten,  that  outside  a  few  of 
t  h<  iso  of  England,  the  ancient  Chroniclers  of 
Kurupe  make  no  mention  whatever  of  the 
Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls,  until  we  dome 
down  to  the  sixteenth  century, '  when  these 
forgeries  were  copied  from  English  works. 

It  is  also  a  notable  fact  that  all  the  bio- 
graphers of  Pope  Adrian  outside  of  English 
influence,  make  no  reference  in  their  lives 
of  that  Pontiff  to  his  ever  having  made  any 
donation  of  Ireland  to  King  Henry  II.  of 
England.  A  strong  instance  of  this  char- 
acter is  found  in  the  sketch  of  the  Ponti- 
ficate of  Pope  Adrian  IV.  written  by  the 
great  Dominican  St.  Antoninus,  who  flour- 
ished in  the  fifteenth  century,  and  who  is 
silent  concerning  any  donation.  This  saint- 
ly scribe  quotes  the  Polycraticus  of  Salis- 
bury, but  he  omits  altogether  the  interpo- 
lated addenda  which  constitute  the  forty- 
second  chapter  of  the  Metalogiciis,  treating 
of  Ireland  and  the  fictitious  donation.  1 


TWO    OTHER    BIOGRAPHERS    OF    ADRIAN    IV. 

In  the  fourteenth  century  so  little  was 
known  of  the  Papal  Bull  attributed  to  Pope 
Adrian,  that  even  the  eminent  Ecclesiastics 
who  were  denizens  of  the  Papal  Court  had 
no  knowledge  of  its  existence.  Two  elabor- 
ate biographies  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  were 
written  during  that  period  by  eminent  men 
who  resided  at  the  Pontifical  Court  of 
Avignon,  neither  of  which  contain  the 
slightest  allusion  to  any  compact  said  to 
have  existed  between  that  Pontiff  and  King 
Henry  of  England. 

The  first  biography  was  the  work  of  the 
learned  Dominican,  Guidonis,  who  died  in 
1331.  The  other  work  was  composed  by 
Cardinal  d'Arragon,  who  was  raised  to  the 
puq>le  in  1356,  by  Pope  Innocent  VI. 
The  two  biographies  are  contained  in 
Muratori's  Scriptorcs  rernm  Italicarum. 

In  his  biographical  notice  of  Pope  Alex- 
ander III.,  which  follows  that  of  Adrian 
IV.,  Cardinal  d'Arragon  quotes  the  oath  of 
Henry  II.,  in  the  Cathedral  at  Avranches, 


and  he  also  inserts  other  documents  show- 
ing his  intimacy  with  all  the  events  of  that 
Pontiff's  career.  But  as  he  kept  silence  in 
regard  to  the  Bull  of  Adrian,  it  is  a  clear 
proof  that  he  did  not  find  any  mention  of  it 
in  the  Pontifical  Archives. 


1,  §9. 


Antoninus,  Paw  hiatorialia,  Tit  17,  chap. 


GRAFTON'S  ENGLISH  CHRONICLES. 

A  minute  search  through  Graf  ton's  Chron- 
icles, published  in  London  in  the  year  1809, 
and  which  contain  all  the  public  acts  of 
King  Henry  II.,  from  his  birth  to  his  death, 
failed  to  reveal  any  allusion  whatever  to 
either  the  Adrian  or  the  Alexander  Bulls. 
In  fact  this  English  chronicler  says  plainly 
that  Henry  won  Ireland  by  force  of  arms, 
whilst  this  author's  account  of  Henry's 
invasion  also  clearly  implies  that  the  Eng- 
lish monarch  neither  possessed  nor  required 
any  Papal  Letter,  Bull,  Diploma  or  docu- 
ment of  any  kind  whatever  in  order  to  in- 
vade Ireland.  He  had  a  large  army  and  also 
400  ships  strongly  manned,  so  that  by 
force  of  arms  alone  he  was  prepared  to  suc- 
cessfully invade  a  portion  of  the  island,  en- 
tirely regardless  of  any  interference  from 
Rome.  If  no  successor  to  St.  Peter  existed 
in  the  Eternal  City  in  the  twelfth  century, 
the  Invasion  would  still  have  occurred,  for 
Dermod  MacMorrough's  invitation  to  King 
Henry,  as  well  as  to  Strongbow,  and  other 
soldiers  of  fortune  whose  swords  were  at  the 
service  of  any  person  who  wanted  them  for 
conquest  or  defence,  was  the  primal  and  prin- 
cipal cause  of  Ireland's  becoming  a  prey  to 
unprincipled  Norman,  English  and  Welsh 
adventurers. 

Alluding  to  the  precipitate  flight  of  King 
Henry  from  England,  and  the  cause  that 
lead  to  it,  Grafton's  Chronicles — after  al- 
luding to  the  murder  of  St.  Thomaa 
a'Becket  and  the  departure  of  the  King's 
ambassadors  to  Rome  in  order  to  placate 
the  Pope — gives  this  quaint  account  of  that 
eventful  transaction : 

"  The  King's  ambassadors,  lying,  as  U  sayd  in 
lloipe,  could  find  no  grace  or  favour  for  a  long 
tyme  at  the  Pope's  hande.  At  length,  with 
much  ado,  it  was  agreed  that  two  Cardinally 
should  be  sent  down,  to  enquire  oat  the  matter 
concernying  them  that  were  consentying  to 
Becket's  death.  The  King  perceyving  (perceiv- 
ing) what  was  in  preparing  at  Rome,  neither 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


71 


being  yet  eertaine,  whereto  the  intent  of  the 
Pope  and  the  commying  downe  of  the  Cardi- 
nalles  would  tende.  in  the  mean  tyme  addressed 
hymaelf  with  a  greate  power  to  c  nter  into  Ire- 
lande,  giving  charge  and  command  that  no  mes- 
senger from  Borne  shuld  be  permitted  to  enter 
his  kingdome  or  to  pass  unto  Ireland." 

Here  is  a  plain  statement  of  the  reasons 
which  impelled  Henry  to  invade  Ireland. 
He  had  heard  that  the  Papal  Legates  were 
coming  over  to  England  in  order  to  lay  his 
possessions  under  Interdict,  and  he  flew 
over  to  Ireland  so  that  he  could  not  be 
brought  face  to  face  with  the  Pope's  repre- 
sentatives. He  had  neither  Bull,  Rescript, 
or  Letter  of  any  such  ecclesiastical  character 
in  his  possession  at  that  time,  nor  did  he  re- 
quire any  documentary  justification  whatever 
for  his  iniquitous  encroachment  of  a  neigh- 
boring country  which  even  the  Romans  never 
invaded. 


PLOWDEN  S   PLAIN  EVIDENCE. 

The  next  historian  to  whom  we  desire  to 
call  the  attention  of  our  readers  in  order  to 
furnish  evidence  wherewith  to  refute  the 
idea  chat  the  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.  was 
a  genuine  document,  is  Francis  Plowden, 
author  of  an  Historical  Review  of  Ireland 
from  the  Invasion  down  to  the  year  1800. 
Here  is  his  testimony.  Speaking  of  the 
bogus  Bull,  Plowden  says  : 

"The  Irish  nation,  however,  drew  the 
true  line  of  demarcation  between  the  spiri- 
tual and  temporal  power,  by  resisting  this 
inock  donation  of  the  kingdom  to  a  foreigner; 
a  distinction  which  the  nation  has  generally 
made,  but  which  before  the  accession  of  his 
present  majesty  it  had  not  been  allowed  to 
give  earnest  of  upon  oath.  If  anything  can 
strongly  paint  the  abusive  profanation  of  re- 
ligion it  is  certainly  Henry's  attempt  to  gloss 
over  with  a  sanctified  varnish  of  spiritual 
sanction  the  infamous  support  of  an  adul- 
terous tyrant  and  the  more  iniquitous  efforts 
of  his  own  ambition  and  usurpation.  Pos- 
sibly King  Henry  may  have  relied  more 
upon  the  devotion  of  the  Irish  to  the  Ro- 
man mandate  than  upon  the  power  of  his 
arms.  In  the  first  he  was  disappointed,  and 
he  would  have  failed  in  the  latter  had  Ire- 
land been  united  in  itself.  "§ 

§Plowden'a  History  of  Ireland,  pp.  27-8 


It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  dilate  at  any 
length  upon  this  denunciatory  language  of 
Plowden,  as  every  reader  can  easily  com- 
prehend the  indignation  which  that  writer 
manifests  at  the  outrage  perpetrated  by 
King  Henry  in  order  to  cast  a  religious 
cloak  over  his  rascally  invasion  of  Ireland. 

Plowden  plainly  points  out  that  the  Irish 
people  resisted  the  mock  donation  of  their 
kingdom  to  a  foreigner,  and  that  they  clear- 
ly recognized  the  infamy  of  King  Henry, 
in  attempting  to  gloss  over  with  English- 
made  "spiritual  varnish,"  the  infamous 
designs  of  his  iniquitous  invasion.  The 
Irish  people  saw  at  once  through  his  ill-con- 
cealed ''profanation  of  religion,"  and 
hence  they  repudiated  both  Henry  and  his 
spurious  Bull-  as  innovations  upon  their 
vested  rights  and  their  ancient  liberty. 
Thus  Irish  perspicuity  and  patriotism  com- 
bined in  the  rejection  of  both  the  bogus 
Bull  of  Adrian  IV.,  and  the  British  King 
who  tried  to  invade  Ireland  under  the  false 
cloak  of  religion. 


"  BOWER'S     HISTORY   OF   THE    POPES." 

Archibald  Bower,  the  author  of  this  work,  || 
was  a  Scotchman  who  was  born  in  1685, 
educated  for  the  Priesthood  in  Douay,  went 
to  Rome,  thence  to  England,  where  he 
apostatized  in  1726,  recanted  in  1745,  and 
cast  himself  into  the  arms  of  heretics  again 
in  1777.  Like  all  the  Priests  who  became 
perverts  he  followed  the  example  of  Luthei, 
having  married  the  neice  of  a  Protestant 
bishop  in  1749,  and  then  he  died  September 
2nd,  1766,  in  the  80th  year  of  his  age. 

We  narrate  these  events  in  the  life  of  this 
unfortunate  changeling  in  order  that  our 
readers  may  fully  understand  that  Bower 
was  not  partial  to  the  Popes  whose  lives  he 
has  written,  as  the  evidence  he  gives  con- 
cerning the  Adrian  Bull  gains  much  addi- 
tional strength  when  this  fact  is  fully  under- 
stood. Mr.  Bower  was  a  Scotchman,  and, 
being  an  apostate,  of  course  he  hated  the 
Irish  people  for  their  consistent  fidelity 
to  the  Catholic  Faith,  even  at  the  expense 
of  life,  liberty  and  property.  This  fact 
should  also  be  borne  in  mind  in  order  to 

i | History  of  the  Popes  from  the  Foundation  of 
the  See  of  Rome  to  the  Present  Time.  By 
Archibald  Bower.  London  :  VoL  vi.  pp  107. 


72 


THE      POPE      AMD      IRELAND. 


understand  that  his  sentiment*  were  purely 
the  result  of  his  experience  in  reading  and 
his  knowledge  of  Irish  history,  and  not  from 
any  partiality  for  the  Pope  or  the  Irish  peo- 
ple. 

Having  followed  other  English  authors  in 
saying  that  King  Henry  made  the  Pope  ac- 
quainted with  his  designs  on  Ireland  and 
that  the  English  monarch  begged  the  advice 
and  favor  of  the  Apostolic  See,  Bower  says  : 

"It  were  to  be  wished  that  Hadrian"  had 
told  us  upon  what  he  grounded  his  undoubted 
claim  of  Ireland,  and  to  all  other  islands  that 
had  embraced  the  Christian  faith.  But  neither 
he  nor  his  successors  have  to  this  day  thought 
fit  to  let  the  world  into  that  secret. 

"  What  the  King  and  the  Pope  meant  that 
the  end  of  the  intended  expedition  against  Ire- 
land was  to  extend  the  bounds  of  the  Church, 
I  know  not.  The  Christian  faith  had  been 
planted  in  Ireland  many  ages  before,  and  they 
had  at  thia  time  a  settled  Church,  governed  by 


•  H%drian.      Nf«rly  all    the  old  Chroniclers 
print  Adrian  thuo. 


its  proper  Bishops  and  Metropolitans,  who  had 
a  few  yean  before  received  their  Palliums  from 
Roma,  and  they  were,  for  aught  that  appeal  B  to 
the  contrary,  as  orthodox  in  their  faith,  and  •* 
regular  in  their  discipline,  as  most  other  nations." 

Here  we  find  even  an  apostate  from  the 
faith  of  his  forefathers  who  bears  testimony 
to  the  fact  that  the  Catholic  Church  in  Ire- 
land was  in  a  far  better  moral  and  spiritual 
condition  than  is  designated  by  the  denun- 
ciatory terms  of  the  manipulated  Adrian 
and  Alexander  Bulls  !  In  the  Adrian  Bull 
the  Pope  is  made  to  say  that  Ireland  was  in  a 
state  of  moral  iniquity  and  religious  dark- 
ness, whilst  Mr.  Bower  expresses  his  aston- 
ishment that  any  such  charges  could  be 
brought  in  a  Papal  document  against  a 
Church  that  was  "  as  orthodox  in  faith  and 
as  regular  in  discipline  as  must  other  na- 
tions." Evidently  Mr.  Bower  surmized 
that  no  Pope  ever  saw  the  Adrian  Bull,  and 
he  was  thoroughly  correct  in  his  conclusion. 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


73 


CHAPTER    XII. 

Continuation  of  the  Evidence  of  Historical  Writers  in  proof  of  the  False  Character  of 
the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls. — Absurd  Statements  of  English  and  Irish 
Historians.— How  "Iniquity  Hath  Lied  to  Itself." 


In  addition  to  the  testimony  which  we 
have  already  compiled,  in  order  to  show  the 
spurious  character  of  the  Adrian  Bull,  we 
now  desire  to  introduce  the  evidence  of 
other  writers  regarding  that  dubious  docu- 
ment. 

ABBE  MAC  GEOGHEGAN'S  TESTIMONY. 

In  the  first  article  of  the  present  series, 
we  have  given  a  portion  of  the  strong  evi- 
dence which  Abbb  MacGeoghegan's  History 
of  Ireland  furnishes,  in  order  to  prove  the 
spurious  nature  of  both  the  Adrian  and 
Alexander  Bulls.  The  annexed  paragraphs 
from  the  same  work,  are,  therefore,  confir- 
matory of  what  has  already  been  said  by 
that  distinguished  Irish  historian.  Com- 
menting on  the  text  of  the  Adrian  Bull 
Abbe  MacGeoghegan  says  : 

The  ab  >ve  was  an  edict  pronounced  against 
Ireland,  by  which  the  rights  of  men,  and  the 
most  sacred  laws  are  violated,  under  the  specious 
pretext  of  religion  and  the  reformation  of  morals. 
The  Irish  were  no  longer  to  possess  a  country. 
That  people,  who  had  never  bent  under  a  for- 
eign yoke,  nunquam  externce  subjacuil  ditioni, 
were  condemned  to  lose  their  liberty,  without 
even  being  heard.  But  can  the  Vicar  of  Jesus 
Christ  be  accused  of  so  glaring  an  act  of  injus- 
tice? Can  he  be  thought  capable  of  having  dic- 
tated a  Bull  which  overthrew  an  entire  nation, 
which  dispossessed  so  many  ancient  proprietors 
of  their  patrimonies,  caused  so  much  blood  to  be 
shed,  and  at  length  tended  to  the  destruction  of 
leligion  in  the  island  ?  It  is  a  thing  not  to  be 
conceived. 

In  truth  were  we  to  consider  the  circum- 
stances and  motives  of  the  Bull,  it  has  all  the 
appearance  of  a  fictitious  one,  under  the  borrowed 
name  of  Adrian  IV.  Baronius  quotes  it,  with- 
out giving  any  date  of  year  or  day,  which  would 
make  it  suspicious  ;  it  remained  unpublished  for 
seventeen  years ;  it  is  said  that  it  was  fabricated 
in  1155,  and  not  made  public  till  1172.  *  *  * 

The  Bull  gains  but  little  authentication  from 
the  authority  of  John  of  Salisbury,  afterwards 
Bishop  of  Chartres,  in  his  treatise  "  <(e  nugis 
curialibus"  The  writer  is  made  to  say,  at 
the  end  of  the  last  chapter  of  his  fourth 
book,  that  "  Pope  Adrian^  had  granted  Ire- 


land to  King  Henry,  at  his  request,  it  being 
the  patrimony  of  his  Holiness  by  hereditary 
right,  inasmuch  as  all  the  islands  belonged  to 
the  Roman  Church,  by  the  concession  of  the 
Emperor  Constantino  the  Great."  But  this  non- 
sense  is  considered  by  the  learned  aa  having 
been  added  to  the  chapter  by  a  strange  hand; 
since  the  author,  in  ppeaking  particularly  in  the 
sixth  and  eighth  books  of  his  visit  to  the  Holy 
Father  at  Benevento,  where  he  remained  with 
him  for  three  months,  states  most  minutely  the 
various  conversations  he  had  with  his  Holiness, 
without  making  any  mention  of  the  Bull  in  ques- 
tion,  though  it  was  a  matter  of  particular  im- 
portance, and  that  was  naturally  the  fit  time  to 
have  mentioned  it.  Pierre  de  Blois,  a  zealous 
panegyrist  of  this  Prelate,  who  publishes  his 
praises  in  various  epistles,  makes  no  mention  of  it 
either. 

It  is  well  known  that  King  Henry,  who  found 
creatures  sufficiently  devoted  to  him  to  revenge 
his  quarrel  with  the  holy  Prelate  of  Canterbury, 
did  not  want  for  venal  writers  to  add  to,  and  re- 
trench from,  the  writings  of  the  times,  in  ord^r  to 
give  an  appearance  of  authenticity  to  a  documei<t 
so  necessary  for  the  justification  of  his  conduct. 
Besides,  it  appears  that  Salisbury  had  gone  to 
Italy  of  his  own  accord,  and  through  curiosity, 
to  visit  his  countryman  Adrian,  and  not  with  any 
commission  from  the  King  of  England  ;  while 
the  Bull,  according  to  Mathew  of  Westminster, 
was  obtained  by  a  solemn  embassy,  which  Henry 
had  sent  to  the  Pope.  In  my  opinion,  however, 
this  circumstance  appears  to  be  another  fable 
added  to  the  former,  as  he  is  the  first  who  men- 
tions this  embassy,  and  that  two  centuries  after 
wards.  The  silence,  too,  of  Nubrigensis,  an 
English  contemporary  author,  respecting  this 
embassy  and  the  Bull  which  it  is  affirmed  was 
granted,  is  an  argument  which,  though  negative, 
deserves  some  attention.  This  author,  who  was 
so  zealous  for  the  glory  of  Henry  II.,  and  his 
nation,  commences  his  narrative  by  saying  that 
the  English  had  entered  Ireland  in  a  warlike 
manner,  and  that,  their  forces  increasing  everv 
day,  they  subjugated  a  considerable  part  of  it.* 
He  makes  no  mention  of  a  Bull  granted  by  any 
Pope ;  and  I  consider  it  highly  improbable  that 

*  "  At  this  time  the  English  made  a  descei>t 
upon  Ireland  in  a  warlike  manner,  and  their 
numbers  having  increased,  they  became  masters 
of  no  inconsiderable  part  of  it  by  force  of  arms." 
— Nubrigensis,  de  Rebus.  Anglic,  b.  2,  c  26. 


74 


TIIK      POPE      AND      IRELAXD. 


he  would  have  forgotten  to  speak  of  a  circum- 
stance BO  necessary  to  give  an  appearance  of 
justice  to  the  unprecedented  conduct  of  his  na- 
tion. However  this  be.  it  may  be  affirmed  that 
no  Pope,  either  before  or  after  Adrian  IV.,  ever 
punished  a  nation  so  severely  without  cause. 
We  have  seen  instances  of  Popes  making  use  of 
their  spiritual  authority  in  opposition  to  crowned 
heads;  we  have  known  them  to  exc-mmunicate 
emperors  and  kings,  and  place  their  states  uuder 
an  interdict,  for  crimes  of  heresy,  or  other 
causes ;  but  we  here  behold  innocent  Ireland 
given  up  to  tyrants,  without  having  been  sum 
moned  before  any  tribunal,  or  convicted  tf  any 
crime. 

It  would  be  entirely  a  work  of  superero  • 
gation  on  our  part  to  add  a  single  word  of 
comment  to  the  clear,  concise  and  convin- 
cing testimony  which  the  learned  Abbe  Mac- 
Geoghegan  offers  in  order  to  show  that  he 
had  no  doubts  whatever  upon  his  mind  in 
regard  to  the  spurious  character  of  the  bogus 
Adrian  BulL  Hence  we  will  leave  our 
readers  to  draw  their  own  conclusions 
from  the  foregoing  extracts,  and  proceed  to 
produce  other  witnesses  in  support  of  the 
Catholic  side  of  this  question. 


FATHER  THOMAS   N.    BDRKE  8  EVIDENCE. 

The  next  witness  whose  evidence  we  in- 
troduce in  order  to  show  the  fallacy  and  the 
fraudulent  character  of  the  Adrian  and 
Alexander  Bulls,  is  the  celebrated  Domini- 
can, Father  Thomas  N.  Burke,  of  cherished 
memory,  who  was  both  a  great  Catholic 
Priest  and  a  distinguished  Irish  Patriot. 

In  his  first  Lecture  in  answer  to  Froude, 
which  was  delivered  in  the  Academy  of 
Music,  New  York,  on  the  evening  of  No- 
vember 12th,  1872,  Father  Burke  alluded  to 
the  Norman  Invasion  of  Ireland  and  the 
forged  Bulls  of  Adrian  and  Alexander,  in 
the  following  terms  of  unqualified  con- 
demnation : 

Henry  landed  in  Ireland  in  1171.  He  was 
after  murdering  the  Holy  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury,  St.  Thomas  a'Becket.  They  scattered 
his  brains  before  the  fcot  of  the  altar,  before 
the  Blessed  Sacrament  at  the  Vesper  hour.  The 
blood  of  the  saint  and  martyr  was  upon  his 
hand*  when  he  came  to  Ireland  to  teach  the 
Irish,  "  Thou  shall  not  kill"  What  was  the 
occasion  of  their  coming  ?  When  the  adulterer 
was  driven  from  the  sacred  soil  of  Erin  as  one 
unworthy  to  profane  it  by  his  tread,  he  went 


over  to  Henry  and  procured  from  him  a  letter 
permitting  any  of  his  subj  ;cts  that  chose  to  em- 
bark for  Ireland  to  do  HO,  and  there  to  reinstate 
the  adulterous  tyrant  King  Dermot  in  hi«  king- 
dom. They  came  there  as  protectors  and  help- 
er* of  adultery  to  teach  the  Irish  people,  "  Thou 
shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbor's  wife."  *  *  * 

But  suppose  that  Popa  Adrian  had  given  the 
letter  to  King  Henry,  and  Henry  had  kept  it  so 
secret  because  hi*  mother,  the  Empress  Matilda, 
did  not  want  him  to  act  upon  it.  Well,  when 
he  did  act  upon  it.  why  did  he  not  produce  it  ? 
That  was  the  only  warrant  on  which  he  came  to 
Ireland,  invaded  the  country  and  never  breathed 
a  word  to  a  human  being  about  that  letter. 
There  is  a  lie  on  the  face  of  it !  Oh  !  Mr.  Froude 
reminded  me  "to  remember  that  Alexander 
III.,  bis  successor,  mentions  that  rescript  of 
Adrian's,  and  confirms  it."  I  answer,  with  Dr. 
Lynch  and  the  learned  author  Dr.  Moran,  of 
Oasory,  and  with  many  other  Irish  scholars  and 
historians,  that  Alexander's  letter  is  a  forgery  at 
well  as  Adrian's. 

I  grant  that  there  are  learned  men  who  admit 
the  Bull  of  Adrian  and  Alexander's  Rescript ; 
but  there  are  equally  learned  men  who  deny 
that  Bull,  and  I  have  as  good  reason  to  believe 
one  as  the  other,  and  /  prefer  to  believe  it  was  a 
forgery.  Alexander's  letter  bears  the  date  1172. 
Now,  let  us  see  whether  it  is  likely  for  the  Pope 
Alexander  to  give  Henry  such  a  letter,  recom- 
mending him  to  go  to  Ireland,  the  beloved  son 
of  the  Lord,  to  taka  care  of  the  Church,  etc. 
Remember  it  is  said  that  Adrian  give  the  Re- 
script and  did  not  know  the  man  he  gave  it  to. 
But  Alexander  knew  him  well !  Henry  in  1159 
and  1160,  supported  the  Anti-Popes  against 
Alexander,  and,  according  to  Matthew  of  West- 
minster, King  Henry  II.,  obliged  every  one 
in  England  from  the  boy  of  twelve  years  of 
age  to  the  old  man,  to  renounce  their  alle- 
giance to  Alexander  III.  and  go  over  to  the 
Anti-Popes.  Now,  u  it  likely  that  Alexander 
would  give  him  a  Re-script  telling  him  to  go  to 
Ireland  then  and  settle  ecclesiastical  matters  ? 
Alexander  himself  wrote  to  Henry,  and  said  to 
him :  "Instead  of  remedying  the  disorders 
caused  by  your  predecessor*,  you  have  added 
prevarication  to  prevarication;  you  have  op- 
pressed the  Church,  and  endeavored  to  destroy 
the  canons  of  Apostolic  men."  *  * 

It  was  this  man  that  was  sent  over  as  an 
Apostle  of  morality  to  Ireland  ;  he  who  was  the 
man  accused  of  violating  the  betrothed  wife  of 
his  own  son,  Richard  I.;  a  man  whose  crimes 
will  not  bear  repetition ;  a  man  who  was  be- 
lieved by  Europa  to  be  possessed  of  the  devil ;  a 
man  of  whom  it  is  written  "that  when  he  got 
into  a  fit  of  anger  he  tore  off  his  clothes  and  sat 
naked,  chewing  straw  like  a  beast."  Further- 


THK      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


75 


more,  IB  it  likely  that  a  Pope  who  knew  him  BO 
well,  who  suffered  so  much  from  him,  would 
have  sent  him  to  Ireland— the  murderer  of 
Bishops,  the  robber  of  churches,  the  destroyer 
of  ecclesiastical  liberty,  and  every  fiorm  of  lib- 
erty that  cams  before  him.  No  !  I  never  will 
believe  that  the  Pope  of  Rjme  was  so  very  short- 
sighted, so  unj  ust  as  by  a  stroke  of  nU  pen  to 
abolish  and  destroy  the  liberties  of  the  most 
faithful  people  who  ever  bjwed  down  in  alle- 
giance to  him. 

Like  the  evidence  of  the  Abbe  MacGeo- 
ghegan,  the  truthful  and  trenchant  testi- 
mony of  the  great  Father  Burke  cannot 
but  carry  conviction  to  the  soul  of  every 
reader  that  is  not  blinded  by  prejudice  or 
political  passion.  Both  these  eminent  and 
immortal  sons  of  Holy  Mother  Church 
looked  at  this  vexed  question  from  a  truly 
Christian  standpoint ;  they  were  anxious 
solely  to  state  the  truth,  and  they  have 
done  so  in  such  a  manner  as  to  stamp  en- 
tirely out  of  existence  any>  pretensions  to 
authenticity  which  the  spurious  Bulls,  to 
which  the  names  of  Popes  Adrian  and  Alex- 
ander were  forged,  may  have  gained  during 
the  past  seven  centuries. 


THOMAS    MOONEY  S    TESTIMONY. 

Thomas  Mooney,  whose  History  of  Ire- 
land is  doubtless  familiar  to  many  of  our 
readers,  thus  alludes  to  the  two  Bulls  which 
were  fabricated  by  order  of  King  Henry 
the  Second  of  England  : 

It  was  pretended  by  King  Henry  that  Adrian 
the  Fvurth  had  made  over  the  whole  of  Ireland 
to  him.  He  lost  no  time,  therefore,  on  his  ar- 
rival, in  inviting  the  clergy  of  the  South  and  the 
West  to  a  grand  Conference,  at  the  ancient  seat 
of  legislation  in  CashelL  The  pretended  Bull 
of  Adrian  which  had  been  dead  eighteen  years, 
was  produced.  It  set  forth  the  anxieties  of  the 
Holy  See  to  have  virtue  and  religion  cultivated 
in  Ireland,  and  the  chief  pastors  obedient  and 
submissive  to  the  Sovereign  Pontiff  ;  and  the 
better  to  insure  this  object,  the  clergy  and  peo- 
ple of  Ireland  were  called  upon  to  receive  Henry 
the  Second  of  England  as  their  king.  A  second 
Bull,  confirming  the  foregoing,  purporting  to  be 
from  Alexander  the  Third,  was  also  read ;  and 
though  this  one  also  has  since  been  proved  a  forgery, 
yet  it  had  an  astounding  effect  on  the  assembly. 

No  wonder  the  bogus  Alexander  Bull  had 
"  an  astounding  effect  on  the  assembly  !'' 
It  would  have  had  "  an  astounding  effect 
on  any  assembly"  inside  or  outside  of  Ire- 


land !  If  ever  Irish  Bishops,  Priestg  or  lay- 
men listened  to  the  libelous  assaults  upon 
their  race  and  their  religion,  their  morals 
and  their  very  manhood  which  that  anti- 
Christian  concoction  contained,  they  would 
have  torn  it  into  shreds  and  have  flung  the 
fragments  into  the  face  of  King  Henry  him- 
self were  he  present  on  the  occasion  !  There 
is  not  a  single  Bishop  of  the  Catholic  Church 
who  ever  lived — we  care  not  what  his  na- 
tionality may  be— that  would  dare  to  defend 
the  Alexander  Bull  as  a  Papal  document. 
The  very  idea  that  the  Irish  people  are 
styled  therein  '"  Christians  only  in  name," 
is  enough  to  brand  this  document  as  fraudu- 
lent on  its  very  face,  and  enough  is  known 
of  the  aggressive  character  of  the  Irish  peo- 
ple to  warrant  us  in  saying  that  it  would  be 
unsafe  for  any  reader  to  proclaim  such  a 
scurrillously  falsifying  document  even  in  the 
presence  of  an  assemblage  of  Irish  disciples 
of  the  God  of  Peace  !  It  is  clear,  therefore, 
that  no  Pope  ever  issued  such  a  scandalous 
document,  nor  did  any  assemblage  of  the 
Irish  clergy  ever  undergo  the  dishonor  of 
listening  to  its  libelous  language. 


REV.    J.    J.    BRENNANS   TESTIMONY. 

The  next  witness  we  desire  to  introduce 
on  the  side  of  historical  truth  and  justice 
is  Rev.  J.  J.  Brennan,  the  author  of  a  text- 
book History  of  Ireland  from  which  we 
make  the  following  extract : 

In  1154  Henry  II.  succeeded  to  the  English 
throne,  and  in  the  same  year,  Nicholas  Break- 
spere,  an  Englishman,  was  elected  Pope,  under 
the  title  of  Adrian  IV.  Seeing  his  opportunity, 
Henry  is  said  to  have  asked  and  obtained  per- 
mission from  the  new  Pontiff  to  invade  and  con- 
quer Ireland.  A  Bull,  giving  the  requisite  au- 
thority, is  indeed  attributed  to  Adrian,  but  his- 
torians are  about  equally  divided  as  to  its  au- 
thenticity. If  the  Pope  did  issue  the  document, 
he  had  no  right  whatever  to  do  so,  as  Ireland 
never  belonged  to  Home,  and  such  an  action  on 
his  part  would  be  wholly  unj  ust.  Adrian  IV. , 
however,  was  a  man  of  piety,  and,  as  long  as  we 
are  without  positive  proof  of  his  guilt,  it  is  wrong 
to  blacken  his  character  by  attributing  to  him 
the  lies  and  the  base  motives  contained  in  the 
Bull  in  question. 

JAMES  J.  CLANCY'S  EVIDENCE. 
The  next  witness  we  desire  to  introduce 
in  order  to  give  his  testimony  showing  that, 


THE      POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


even  if  the  Adrian  Bull  was  authentic,  it 
potteased  no  binding  force  on  the  Irish  peo- 
ple, is  James  J.  Clancy  author  of  a  very 
interesting  work  on  Ireland,*  wherein  he 
thus  speaks  of  the  supposed  Bull  by  which 
Henry  II  claimed  to  possess  spiritual  and 
temporal  sovereignty  over  Ireland  : 

Meantime  Henry  II.,  who  had  long  yearned 
to  acquire  the  mastery  of  Ireland,  grew  alarmed 
lest  his  vassal,  StrongV>w.  should  assume  an  in- 
dependent sovereignty  (which  the  latter  might 
claim  through  his  marriage  with  MacMurrough'* 
daughtei).  The  consequence  was  that  in  1172 
Henry  arrived  with  four  thou«aud  five  hundred 
men,  and  exhibited  a  Papal  Ball  investing  him 
with  the  sovereignty  of  Irelai.d.  This  docu- 
ment, alleged  to  have  been  given  by  Adrian 
IV.— the  only  Englishman  that  ever  wore  the 
Roman  tiara— is  a  grievous  stuoibling-bloik  to 
gome  people,  and  countless  are  the  controvemiea 
based  upon  it.  There  is  little  practical  value  in 
such  discussions,  whether  the  Bull  was  forged, 
aa  some  Bay,  or  genuine,  as  is  commonly  con- 
ceded. Had  Heury  brought  a  shipload  of  i-uch 
Bulls,  and  every  one  of  them  authentic,  they 
would  not  have  improved  his  title  one  j  >t,  and 
would  have  no  more  essential  bearing  on  the 
case  to-day  than  so  many  military  order*  signed 
by  Julius  Cseiar.  No  document  can  sanctify 
injustice  or  vindicate  deliberate  fraud.  Above 
and  beyond  all  trafficking  parchments  rest  the 
ina'ienable  rights  of  mankind.  It  is  an  amusing 
fact  that  this  Bull  of  Adrian  is  the  one  solitary 
Papal  utterance  for  which  the  English  people 
profess  gratitude  and  respect.  They  hoot  and 
howl  at  Rome,  yet  they  would  be  ineffably 
thankful  if  Rome  engaged  in  the  holy  and  whole- 
s  >me  work  of  forcing  loyalty  down  the  Irish 
throat.  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  Irish 
Clergy  (who  of  course  were  an  influential  clasp) 
took  no  decisive  and  resolute  stand  against 
Henry's  impudent  claim.  A  large  portion  of 
them  deceived  by  the  Bull  and  desirous  of  peace 
at  almost  any  price,  advised  the  recognition  of 
Henry's  authority,  which  be  it  remembered, 
was  claimed  to  be  a  merely  titular  sovereignty. 
Acting  on  this  ad  vice,  Roderick  O'Connor  signed 
a  treaty  defining  their  mutual  relations,  and  ex 
presaly  stipulating  that  the  English  monarch 
thould  occupy  only  the  position  of  feudal  tuze 
rain  in  Ireland.  Every  subsequent  act  of  Eng- 
liah  aggression  was  a  violation  of  that  first  sol- 
emn compact. 


Bull  of  Pope  Adrian,  granting  the  kingdom  of 
Ireland  to  Henry  II.,  and  obtained  by  thin  BOV. 
creign  from  the  Holy  See  as  far  back  as  Ci/;  year 
//.//  wa»«  for  the  first  time  publicly  announced 
to  his  Irish  hul'jectf.t 

Here  is  an  historical  muddle  worthy  of 
Judge  Maguire  himself  !  Let  us  see  what 
complications  arise  from  this  short  para- 
graph from  the  pen  of  Ireland  s  bard  ? 

Henry  II.  was  born  in  1132,  and  ascended 
the  English  throne  in  1154,  so  that  if  the 
mis  called  "  Adrian"  Bull  was  issued  in 
1151,  it  must  have  been  sent  to  Stephen, 
Bail  of  Blois,  who  reigned  as  King  of  Eng- 
land until  the  year  1153  ! 

Again,  if  the  Bull  signed  "Adrian  IV.," 
was  issued  in  1151,  it  must  have  emanated 
from  Pope  Eugenius  III.,  as  Pope  Adrian 
IV.,  was  not  invested  with  the  tiara  until 
December  3rd,  1154  ! 

If,  therefore,  we  take  Moore's  statement 
of  the  case,  we  will  be  forced  to  believe  the 
"  Adrian"  Bull,  addressed  to  "  Henry  II." 
to  have  been  issued  by  Pope  E  igenius  the 
Third,  and  sent  over  to  England  to  Stephen, 
Earl  of  Blois  !  . 

This  is  a  complicated  historical  enigma, 
the  solution  of  which  we  leave  to  Judge 
Maguire  as  a  penance  for  issuing  his  very 
bad  book  ! 


U 


THOMAS   MOORE  S  TESTIMONY. 
u  about  this  time  (A.  n.  1175)  that  the 


•Ireland :  As  She  I*,  as  She    Has  Been,  and 
M  She  Ought  To  Be.    New  York  :  1877. 


MONSIGNOR   BERNARD   O  BULLY  8    EVIDENCE. 

The  name  and  literary  fame  of  Dr.  Ber- 
nard O'Rielly,  D.  D.,  L.  D.,  is  doubtless 
familiar  to  all  our  readers.  His  numerous 
letters  upon  Irish  subjects  which  have  ap- 
peared in  the  MONITOR,  as  well  as  his  un- 
equalled biography  of  Pope  Leo  XIII., 
have  made  the  name  of  this  distinguished 
Prelate  a  household  word  in  every  part  of 
world. 

Monsignor  O'Rielly  has  also  written  a 
work  on  Ireland,^  in  which  he  casts  an  ad- 
ditional doubt  upon  the  Adrian  Bull,  and 
thus  adds  new  strength  to  the  numer- 
ous proofs  we  have  produced  in  order  to 
clearly  demonstrate  its  spurious  character. 

In  the  work  alluded  to  Mgr.  O'Rielly 
says: 

He  (King  Henry  II.)  produced,  it  is  said,  the 

fHistory  of  Ireland,  Vol.  II.,  pp.  276. 

t"  The  Cause  of  Ireland  Pleaded  Before  the 
Civilized  World."  New  York,  1886. 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


77 


Bull  of  Pope  Adrian,  bestowing  on  him  the 
lordship  of  Ireland.  But  the  latest  and  ripest 
scholamh'p  has  discovered,  in  what  must  be  ac- 
counted the  genuine  Letter  of  Pope  Adrian,  in- 
stead of  an  absolute  gift  of  the  island,  a  positive 
injumtion  laid  on  Henry  in  his  projected  expedi- 
tion to  Ireland,  that  "he  should  attempt  -nothing 
of  the  kind  without  the  consent  of  the  Princes, 
Bishops  and  people  of  Ireland." 

Monsignor  O'Rielly  is  eminently  correct 
when  he  intimates  that  so  far  from  Pope 
Adrian  ever  having  granted  any  Bull,  Brief, 
Rescript  or  Letter  even,  to  King  Henry  of 
England,  authorizing  him  to  invade  Ireland 
for  any  purpose  whatever,  that  learned 
and  just  Pontiff  actually  forbad?  the  in- 
vasion of  that  country,  unless  it  was  done 
with  the  consent  of  the  princes,  Bishops  and 
people  most  interested  in  the  matter.  This 
phase  of  the  question  we  are  elaborating 
will  be  treated  fully  in  a  subsequent  chapter. 


OEOFFREY   KEATING  S    EVIDENCE. 

This  author  was  born  in  Ireland  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  during  the  reign  of  Queen 
Elizabeth.  His  work  was  composed  in  the 
Irish  language,  and  he  states  that  his  his- 
tory was  written  in  order  to  develop  the 
rank  injustice  with  which  Anglo- Irish  au- 
thors before  him  had  treated  every  Irish 
subject.  Speaking  of  the  Bull  of  Pope 
Adrian  IV.  Keating  says  : 

It  must  be  surprising  to  every  one  who  makes 
himself  acquainted   with   Irish  history,  to  find 
such  an  expression  in  the  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian 
as   that  the  King  of  England  was  to  enjoy  the  : 
crown   of  Ireland,   upon   the  condition  that  he  \ 
•would  revive  the  ancient  faith  and  restore  it  to  its 
former  lustre ;    as  if   Christianity  had  been  ex-  , 
pelled,  and  the  people  had  returned  to  a  state  of  ; 
paganism  and  idolatry.      Whoever  gave  this  ac- 
count to  the  Pope  was  as  great  an  enemy  to 
truth   as   he  was   to  the  glory  of  the  Irish  na- 
tion § 

In  the  light  of  facts  already  developed, 
we  join  with  Dr.  Keating  in  his  laudable  in- 
dignation. No  Pope,  either  in  the  twelfth 
or  any  other  century  since  Christianity  came 
into  the  world — had  a  scintilla  of  evidence 
before  him  to  justify  the  outrageous  expres- 
sions employed  in  the  Adrian  and  Alexan- 
der fictitious  Bulls. 

§Vol.  2,  pp.  368. 


Dr.  Keating,  in  order  to  show  the  un- 
truthfulness  of  the  Adrian  Bull,  next  points 
out  the  fact  that  the  Pontiff  must  have 
known  different,  because,  he  says  :  "  it  was 
the  custom  of  the  times''  for  numerous  Irish 
pilgrims  to  journey  to  Rome,  andhementions 
the  names  of  many  of  them.  In  order  also 
to  show  the  absurdity  of  the  Bull  wherein 
it  is  intimated  that  Catholic  faith  was  dead 
in  Ireland  in  the  twelfth  century,  Keating 
says  that  new  churches,  abbeys  and  monas- 
teries were  at  that  period  in  course  of  con- 
struction all  over  Ireland.  This  assertion 
he  supports  by  the  following  facts  and  fig- 
ures : 

St.  Mary's  Abbey,  Dublin,  built  by  Maol- 
seachluin,  King  of  Meath  and  Monarch  of  the 
Island,  in  1139 ;  Abbey  of  Mellifont,  built  by 
Donough  O'<JarrolJ,  Monarch  of  Oirgialiuch, 
1142;  St.  Malachias,  Bishop  of  Each  Dun, 
built  the  Abbey  of  Jobhair  Cintragha,  in  1144. 
Diarmod  MacMorrough,  King  of  Leinster,  laid 
the  foundation  of  the  Abbey  of  Baltinglass  in 
the  year  1151.  The  Abbey  of  Beictiff,  in  the 
County  Meath,  the  Abbey  of  O'Dorma  in  the 
County  Kerry,  and  the  Abbey  of  Boyle,  were 
erected  in  1161 ;  Daniel  O'Bryen,  King  of  Lim- 
erick, built  the  Abbey  of  Holy  Cross,  in  the 
County  Pipperary,  in  1169 ;  the  Abbey  o 
Fermony,  in  the  County  Cork,  was  completed 
in  the  year  1170. 

Many  other  instances,  says  Keating,  might 
be  produced  of  churches,  abbeys,  monasteries, 
and  other  religious  foundations  erected  in  those 
pious  times  before  the  English  came  upon  the 
Irish  coast;  and  consequently  it  follows  that 
those  foreigners  did  not  plant  the  Catholic  faith 
in  the  Island,  but  found  it  as  it  was  believed  and 
established  for  many  preceding  ages. 

Such  a  Bull,  therefore,  as  that  to  which 
the  name  of  Adrian  IV.  was  signed  by 
some  English  forger,  never  could  have 
emanated  from  any  other  source  than  the 
mind  of  a  bad,  designing  English  monarch. 


CHARLES   O  KELLY  S    EVIDENCE. 

Charles  O'Kelly,  author  of  Macarice  Ex- 
cidinm  says  "  King  Henry  thought  that 
the  moment  had  come  to  execute  a  plan 
which  he  had  long  previously  conceived. 
In  fact  he  prepared  the  artifices  which  he 
was  to  employ  in  order  to  subjugate  Ireland 
and  to  extend  his  kingdom  by  the  annexa- 
tion of  so  large  a  territory.  For  that  pur- 
pose he  fabricated  a  Bull  of  the  Sovereign 


78 


THE      I>Ol'E      AND      llir.I  \NI>. 


Pontiff,  a  Bull  which  granted  to  him,  said 
/«,  the  domain  of  Ireland,  on  condition 
that  he  would  protect  the  Priesthood,  re- 
establish in  its  ancient  splendor  Catholic 
worship,  and  the  temples  and  altars  that 
were  overturned." 

Inasmuch  as  King  Henry  failed  in  the 
performance  of  any  single  one  of  the  clauses 
of  the  Adrian  Bull,  it  is  certainly  good  proof 
that  he  had  it  manufactured  himself  for  his 
own  base  purposes. 


EVIDENCE    OF    LELAND. 

Thomas  Leland,  the  Protestant  author  of 
the  History  of  Ireland,  which  bears  his 
name,  was  born  in  Dublin  in  the  year  1702. 
He  was  educated  in  Trinity  College,  and 
afterwards  became  Prebendary  of  St  Pat- 
rick's Church  in  that  city.  He  died  in 


1785.  His  work  is  hostile  to  the  Catholic 
Church,  and— like  many  other  so-called 
"  Histories  of  Ireland,"  it  seems  to  have 
been  written  entirely  in  the  interest  of  Eng- 
land. 

After  a  passing  allusion  to  the  Adrian 
Bull,  Leland  furnishes  us  with  evidence  in 
proof  of  the  fact  that  in  his  time  the  long 
chain  of  doubt  which  had  commenced  to  be 
formed  in  men's  minds  even  when  Cam- 
brensis  lived,  slill  continued  to  be  woven, 
link  by  link,  down  to  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury. Here  is  what  Dr.  Leland  says  upon 
this  phase  of  the  spurious  Bull : 

"  Some  Irish  writers,  scandalized  at  the  gross 
representations  of  the  corruptions  and  barbar- 
isms of  their  country,"  (as  depicted  in  the 
Adrian  Bull)  "seemed  willing  to  question  the 
authenticity  of  this  Bull."* 

*Vol.  I.,  pp.  11. 


CHAPTER      XIII. 


Further  Evidence  in  Proof  of  the  Spurious  Character  of  the  Adrian  and  Alexander 
Bulls. — O'Halloran's  History  Dissected. — Extracts  from  the  Historical  Writings 
of  Hume,  Lingard,  Father  Thebaucl,  S.  J.,  and  others. 


1ESTIMONY    PROM    O'HALLORAN'S     HISTORY.* 

The  work  we  design  peering  into  at  pres- 
ent is  one  of  those  so  called  Irish  HLtories 
which  are  bound  in  green  cloth — so  that 
those  who  buy  them  may  actually  judge  the 
book  "  by  the  cover."  On  the  back  of  the 
work  is  stamped  the  name  O'Halloran,  so  as 
to  lead  Irish  people  into  the  false  idea  that 
some  person  with  that  Celtic  patronymic 
was  the  author,  while  on  the  title-page 
appears  the  thoroughly  English  name  of 
"  Dolby."  This  work,  therefore,  is,  to  all 
intents  and  purposes,  a  spurious  History  of 
Ireland,  only  one-third  of  which  was  writ- 
ten by  an  Irish  historian,  whilst  the  other 
two-thirds  are  the  concoction  of  some  hire- 
ling Cockneys  who  were  bitterly  anti- 
Catholic  as  well  as  anti-Irish,  as  we  in- 
tend to  prove  when  we  come  to  cite  certain 
passages. 

*"  The  History  of  Ireland  from  the  Invasion 
by  Henry  II..  to  the  Present  Times."  By  Wil- 
liam Dolby.  New  York. 


This  O'Halloran-Dolby  mixture  is  cited 
very  frequently  in  Judge  Maguire's  bad 
book,  for  the  reason  that  — as  an  English 
publication —it  just  suited  his  anti- Catholic 
views  on  the  question  of  the  bogus  Bulls, 
hence  he  drew  many  of  his  worst  falsehoods 
from  the  prejudiced  pages  of  this  fraudulent 
volume. 

In  the  so  called  O'Halloran  portion  of 
this  Irish- English  History, t  we  are  told  in 
the  body  of  the  work  that  King  Henry 
*'  entered  the  harbor  of  Waterford,  October 
18th,  1172,"  but  the  modern  Editor  of 
O'Halloran's  part,  it  appears  knew  more 
than  the  Irish  historian  did,  and  so  he  added 
this  foot-note  : 

The  reader  will  remember  that  Dr.  Leland 
and  others,  have  unfortunately  followed  the 
authority  of  Giraldus  Cambrensis  for  this  date 
(1172.)  It  has  lately  been  ascertained  that  the 
right  year  is  1171.  Dr.  O'Connor  is  severely  in- 
dignant at  the  mistake.  When  such  learned 

3J4-306-308. 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


79 


Doctors  disagree,  surely  my  friend  O'Halloran 
may  be  excused.  T.  Moore  equitably  observes 
that  it  is  "a  mark  of  carelessness,  unquestion- 
ably, but  by  no  mean*  meriting  the  grave  sev- 
erity with  which  Dr.  O'Connor  remarks  upon 
it." 

Here,  then,  we  have  the  date  of  King 
Henry's  arrival  in  Ireland  decisively  settled 
as  having  taken  place  on  October  18th, 
1171.  Very  well  !  Now  let  us  glance  at 
the  text  of  the  Alexander  Bull  as  it  appears 
on  another  page  of  this  Irish-English  "  his- 
tory," and  we  find  to  our  great  astonish- 
ment that  it  bears  date  1172  !  And  yet 
O'Halloran  says  that  both  the  Adrian  and 
Alexander  Bulls  were  presented  by  the 
English  monarch  before  the  Synod  of  Cas- 
hel,  held  within  a  couple  of  weeks  after 
King  Henry's  arrival  in  Ireland  ! 

This  Cashel  Synod,  O'Halloran  says,  "was 
splendid  and  numerous,"  but  were  it  the 
largest  and  most  gorgeous  assembly  of  nota- 
bles ever  convened  in  the  world,  how,  we 
ask,  in  the  name  of  all  the  mathematicians 
that  ever  lived  from  the  time  of  Euclid 
down  to  our  own  Davies— could  King 
Henry  present  to  any  body  of  men  in  the 
month  of  October,  1171,  a  document  pur- 
porting to  have  been  issued  at  Rome  in  the 
year  following  1 

The  only  way  we  can  account  for  such  a 
blunder  in  the  date  of  the  spurious  Bull  is 
that  King  Henry  II.,  when  he  had  that 
fictitious  document  drawn  up,  did  not  in- 
tend to  invade  Ireland  until  the  year  1172, 
and  he  had  that  date  inscribed  upon  it,  but 
the  murder  of  a  Becket,  and  the  news  that 
two  Papal  Legates  were  coming  over  to 
England  to  lay  his  country  under  Interdict, 
hastened  his  departure  by  several  months, 
and  in  his  flurry  the  King  forgot  to  alter  the 
dale  on  the  spurious  document  I 

Under  the  date  1171,  in  the  O'Halloran 
section  of  this  spurious  Irish  "history,"  we 
are  told  that  King  Henry  of  England  had 
completed  his  rupture  with  Rome  by  the 
murder  of  a' Becket.  Then  the  English- 
Irish  writer  conveniently  sends  Henry  to 
Normandy  to  meet  the  Papal  Legates  ;  then 
he  says  that  Henry  took  the  oath  at 
Avranches,  and  then  and  there  he  was  pres- 
ented with  the  Alexander  Bull,  and  jour- 
neyed to  Ireland  in  the  October  following  ! 


In  this  statement  O'Halloran  stands 
"alone  in  his  glory  !"  Not  even  Carnbren- 
sis,  with  all  his  inventive  faculty  for  false- 
hood, ever  pretended  that  King  Henry 
went  to  Avranches  and  became  reconciled 
to  Pope  Alexander  before  he  entered  Ire- 
land. The  English-Irish  O'Halloran,  there- 
fore, is  guilty  of  a  wilful  perversion  of  truth! 

We  now  come  lo  the  Dolby  "donation" 
to  this  badly-doctored  Irish-English  "his- 
tory," and  on  the  very  first  page  of  the 
English- Irish  portion  of  the  work  the  Cock- 
ney Editor  flMy  contradicts  O'Halloran 
after  this  fashion  : 

While  Henry  was  busy  in  Ireland,  his  sor« 
became  treacherous  and  refractory.  Their  dis- 
obedience was  instigated  by  the  jealousy  of  his 
Queen,  Eleanor,  on  account  of  the  untimely  at- 
tachment of  their  father  to  "Fair  Rosamond" 
Clifford.  The  same  messengers  who  secretly 
brought  him  information  of  the  conduct  of  his 
sons  also  rep  jrted  that  the  two  Cardinals,  Al- 
bert and  Theodine  (who  had  been  delegated  by 
the  Pope  to  make  an  investigation  of  the  death 
of  Thomas  a'Bocket)  were  now  impatient  of  any 
further  delay,  and  required  Henry's  immediate 
presence  in  Normandy,  where  they  had  already 
waited  for  him  about  a  year. 

Here  our  readers  will  at  once  discern  the 
value  of  the  O'Halloran-Dolby  literary  de- 
coction, when  they  find  the  English  continu- 
ator  contradicting  the  Irish  originator  ! 

In  the  O'Halloran  section  of  this  two- 
sided  historical  hodge-podge,  we  were  told 
that  King  Henry  exhibited  the  Adrian  and 
Alexander  forgeries  to  a  grand  Synod  of  the 
Irish  Clergy  in  the  year  1171.  Now  comes 
the  English  Editor  in  his  section,  and  he 
flatly  refutes  O'Halloran  again  by  assuring 
his  readers  that  Henry  obtained  the  Adrian 
Bull  as  far  back  as  the  year  1151,^  and  that 
the  twin  forgeries  were  first  seen  in  Ire- 
land in  1175  or  thereabouts  ! 


There  are  several  other  instances  in  this 
English  Irish  volume  where  contradictions 
occur  similar  to  those  we  have  exposed,  but 
we  will  not  stop  to  notice  them.  Before 
laying  down  this  work,  however,  it  is  well 
that  our  readers  should  know  its  anti-Cath- 
olic character,  and  here  are  instances  there- 
of. Speaking  of  the  Protestant  Reforma- 
tion, the  English  Protestant  editor  says  : 

It   is  to  be  hoped  that  these  slight  and  im- 

£0'Halloian-Dolby  History,  p.  28. 


80 


THB       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


perfect  notices  of  the  state  of  Ireland  during  the 
fifteenth  century  will  enable  the  reader  to  judge 
how  the  great  "  Reformation"  of  the  succeeding 
century  nhould  be  estimated,  with  reference  to 
the  ilomtttic  and  educational  benefit*  proposed  to 
be  tkttt  conferred  on  the  Irish  people ;  and  also  ita 
effect*  on  the  welfare  of  mankind  generally.* 

On  another  page  of  the  Dolby  addition 
occurs  a  virulent  attack  on  "  that  fatal  de- 
lusion" Monaaticism,  and  on  still  another 
paget  we  are  told  that  "  ihe  Reformation 
in  England  was  supported  by  the  majority 
of  the  people  and  a  great  body  of  the  Clergy, 
iceary  of  the  Papal  yoke."  On  the  same 
page  "  the  Romish  Church"  is  alluded  to  in 
no  very  complimentary  terms,  showing  the 
virulence  of  the  English  Protestant  Dolby. 
On  another  page+  Queen  Mary  of  Eng- 
land is  said  "  to  have  fully  proved  her 
right"  to  the  title  of  "  Bloody,"  and  Queen 
Elizabeth  is  painted  as  an  angelic  creature 
who  had  all  the  virtues  of  her  sex  ! 

Such  is  the  source  from  which  Judge  Ma- 
guire  drew  most  of  his  calumnies  against 
the  Popes  and  the  Catholic  Church,  and 
when  he  went  to  such  a  work  for  the  pur- 
pose of  fortifying  his  falsehoods,  he  at  once 
exposed  his  venomous  hatred  towards  that 
holy  Church  which  made  him  a  Christian. 
The  double  faced  Dolby  and  his  coterie  of 
English  contributors  were  just  the  men 
Judge  Maguire  should  have  fellowship  with, 
a*  they  are  in  perfect  unanimity  with  him 
in  their  hatred  of  all  things  Catholic. 

HISTORIAN   HUME'S    TESTIMONY. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  tell  our  readers 
that  David  Hume,  the  English  historian, 
was  no  friend  either  of  the  Catholic  Church 
or  of  the  Irish  people.  Hence  it  is  reason- 
able to  conclude  that  his  account  of  the 
so-called  "Conquest  of  Ireland,"  was  writ- 
ten from  a  thoroughly  anti-Catholic  and 
anti-Irish  standpoint.  The  man  who  could 
say  that  the  "  Irish  from  the  beginning  of 
time  were  buried  in  the  most  profound  bar- 
1'insin  and  ignorance,'1  could  not  be  ex- 
pected to  write  impartially  on  any  question 
wherein  the  interests  of  Rome  and  Ireland 
w«  re  at  stake. 

In  view  of  this  fact,    it  is  not  surprising 

•i'«ge97.        fPagelM.        J  Page  174. 


to  learn  from  Hume§  that  the  Irish  were 
"  imperfectly  converted  to  Christianity  by 
some  missionaries  from  Britain."  "Pope 
Adrian,  therefore,"  continues  Hume,  "in 
the  year  1 156,  issued  a  Bull  in  favor  of 
Henry,  in  which,"  says  the  English  his- 
torian, "the  Pope  exhorts  the  King  to 
invade  Ireland,"  gives  the  English  King 
"entire  right  and  authority  over  the  island, 
commanding  all  the  inhabitants  to  obey 
him  as  their  sovereign,  and  invests  with 
full  power  all  such  godly  instruments  [!]  as 
he  (the  king)  should  think  proper  to  employ 
in  an  enterprise  they  calculated  to  under- 
take for  the  glory  of  God  and  the  salvation  of 
the  souls  oj  men. " 

What  irony  !  Is  it  possible  that  we  are 
asked  to  believe  that  any  Pope  of  Rome 
would  ever  delegate  his  supreme  spiritual 
authority  as  Vicar  of  Christ  to  a  layman  ? 
Not  only  that --if  what  Hume  states  is  true 
— but  the  Adrian  Bull  actually  permits 
Henry  to  delegate  his  supreme  spiritual  au- 
thority to  "all  such  godly  instruments"  as  the 
King  might  select  !  No  matter  how  igno- 
rant, vicious,  immoral  or  heretical  these 
disciples  of  King  Henry  might  be,  they 
could  not  be  interfered  with  by  Priest, 
Bishop,  Cardinal,  or  even  by  the  Pope  him- 
self !  Can  any  sane  man  calmly  come  to 
the  conclusion  that  the  Vicar  of  Christ  ever 
delegated  such  spiritual  jurisdiction  to  any 
body  of  unknown  men  ?  We  hope,  for  the 
honor  of  the  intellectual  enlightenment  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  there  is  not  one  such 
man  to  be  found  in  the  world  ! 

No  Pontiff  could  delegate  such  powers  as 
the  spurious  Bull  attributed  to  Pope  Adrian 
designates.  The  document  was  gotten  up 
by  King  Henry  himself,  aided  by  some  of 
his  household  officials,  and,  as  that  monarch 
endeavored  during  the  lifetime  of  St.  Thom- 
as a'Becket  to  be  Pope  of  the  Catholic 
Church  in  England,  and  caused  St.  Thomas 
to  be  murdered  because  he  thwarted  his  ec- 
clesiastical ambition,  it  waa  the  most  na- 
tural thing  in  the  world  to  suggest  to  his 
amanuensis  that  he  place  in  the  body  of  the 
bogus  Bull  a  clause  by  which  the  King 
could  appoint  ecclesiastics  in  Ireland  who 
would  carry  out  his  intentions  when  he  had 
invaded  that  country. 

$  History  of  England,  Vol.  I.,  pp,  330,  tt  stq. 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


81 


This,  to  our  ?iiind,  is  very  clear,  and  this 
fact  goes  far  to  prove  the  spurious  character 
of  the  Adrian  Bull. 

Hume  tells  ua  that  Dermot  MacMor- 
rogh,  King  of  Leinster,  appealed  to  King 
Henry  when  he  was  staying  in  France,  to 
help  the  Irish  monarch  to  regain  his  pos- 
sessions. Henry  promised  his  assistance, 
accepted  MacMorrogh  as  his  vassal,  and, 
adds  Hume :  "  gave  MacMorrogh  letters 
patent  by  which  he  empowered  all  his  sub- 
jects to  aid  the  Irish  prince  in  the  recovery 
of  his  dominions." 

What  a  pity  it  was  that  Henry  had  not  his 
forged  Bull  ready  for  this  emergency  ?  This 
meeting  between  MacMorrogh  and  Henry 
took  place  in  1172,  according  to  Hume  ; 
the  Adrian  Bull  was  supposed  to  have  been 
issued  in  1155,  so  that  seventeen  years  after 
Pope  Adrian  gave  Ireland  over  to  King 
Henry  of  England,  the  most  that  King 
could  do  for  the  restoration  of  the  territorial 
possessions  of  the  King  of  Leinster  was  to 
ask  his  English  subjects  to  assist  him  ! 

If,  as  some  writers  allege,  Henry  had  the 
Adrian  Bull  in  his  possession  at  that  period, 
why  did  he  not  carry  out  its  provisions  ? 
Hume  says  Pope  Adrian  gave  Henry  "  en- 
tire right  and  authority  over  the  island, 
commanded  all  its  inhabitants  to  obey  him 
as  their  sovereign,  and  invested  with  full 
power  all  such  godly  instruments"  as  Henry 
should  select  to  Christianize  the  Irish  peo- 
ple ! 

Why,  therefore,  did  not  Henry  delegate 
MacMorrogh  as  one  of  the  "godly  instru- 
ments," whom  he  had  authority  to  select  to 
represent  the  Roman  Pontiff  in  England's 
new  territorial  acquisition  ]  With  a  copy  of 
the  Adrian  Bull  and  Henry's  letter  of  ap- 
pointment to  such  an  ecclesiastical  position 
of  dignity  and  power,  MacMorrogh  could 
have  gone  back  to  Ireland  and  preached 
from  the  pulpit  in  Armagh  Cathedral — and 
even  the  Primate  himself  could  not  have 
prevented  such  a  scandal  ! 

But  Henry's  Bull  was  not  yet  born  ;  so 
he  could  not  avail  himself  of  such  a  splen- 
did opportunity  to  gore  the  Irish  people 
in  order  to  despoil  them  of  life,  liberty  and 
happiness  ! 


Hume  next  informs  us  that  "  Henry, 
jealous  of  the  progress  made  by  his  own 
subjects,  sent  orders  to  recall  all  the  Eng- 
lish, and  he  made  preparations  to  attack 
Ireland  in  person."  Why  should  King 
Henry  "  attack  Ireland,"  if  he  had  the  Ad- 
rian Bull  and  that  other  document  which  is 
conveniently  called  the  "confirmatory" 
Bull  of  Alexander  ?  The  Irish  people  had 
shown  no  animosity  toward  Henry.  Ac- 
cording to  Hume,  the  Norman  and  English 
adventurers  had  mowed  down  all  the  Irish 
that  appeared  before  them,  and  when 
Strongbow  passed  through  Ireland  "he  had 
no  other  occupation  than  to  receive  the 
homage  of  his  new  subjects." 

It  would  appear,  therefore,  that  instead 
of  making  preparations  to  "attack  Ireland," 
which  had — according  to  Hume— already 
been  virtually  conquered — the  most  feasible 
action  on  King  Henry's  part  would  have 
been  to  have  sent  a  couple  of  "  godly  in- 
struments'  over  to  Ireland,  with  copies  of 
the  Adrian  Bull  for  all  the  Bishops  of  that 
country,  and  then  awaited  the  entire  sur- 
render of  the  spiritual  and  temporal  suprem- 
acy of  Ireland  into  his  Majesty's  keeping  ! 
As  Henry  did  not  do  this,  it  is  very  reason- 
able to  conclude  that  the  Adrian  Bull  was 
not  in  his  stall  at  Winchester  Castle  during 
the  ever-memorable  year  of  our  Lord,  1171. 


FATHER    THEBAUD  S    TESTIMONY. 

The  eminent  Jesuit  whose  work*  we  will 
now  introduce  as  evidence  against  the  gen- 
uineness of  the  Adrian  Bull,  did  not  enter 
into  any  extensive  review  of  that  long-con- 
troverted document.  He  merely  alludes  to 
it  incidentally,  but  he  was  evidently  con- 
vinced that  the  Adrian  document  was  dic- 
tated by  King  Henry  of  England,  and  that 
Pope  Adrian  IV.  had  nothing  whatever  to 
do  with  it. 

Alluding  to  the  rebellion  which  broke  out 
in  Ireland  when  John  Lackland  went  over 
there  in  order  to  smite  the  Irish  to  the 
earth  by  means  of  a  glance  of  his  English 
eye,  Father  Thebaud,  says  : 

This  solemn  protest  was  not  without  effect 
in  Europe.  At  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of 

*"The  Irish  Race  in  the  Past  and  Present." 
By  Rev.  Augustus  J.  Thebaud,  S.  J.  New 
York.  1873. 


82 


THK       POPK       AND      IRELAND. 


Richard  I.,  Clement  Id.,  on  appointing,  by 
the  King's  rc'juest,  William  de  Longchamps, 
Bishop  of  Ely,  an  his  Legate  in  England,  Wales 
and  Ireland,  took  good  care  to  limit  the  au- 
thority of  this  Prelate  to  those  parts  of  Ireland 
which  lay  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Earl  of 
Moreton— that  is,  of  John,  brother  to  Richard. 
He  had  power  to  exercise  his  jurisdiction  "tn 
A  nglia,  Wallia,  ct  Hits  Hibernice  partibut  in  qui- 
lutJoinnts  Morctonii  Comes  potettitem  habtt  et 
rioninium."—(MaUh.  Paris)  It  would  seem, 
ihtn,  that  Clement  III.,  knew  nothing  of  the 
Mull  of  Adrian  IV. 

Pope  Clement  ascended  the  Chair  of  St. 
Peter  December  19th,  1187,  nearly  a  third 
of  a  century  after  the  Adrian  Bull  is  sup- 
posed to  have  been  issued,  yet  he  knew 
nothing  about  it ! 

DR.  LTNGARD'S  EVIDENCE. 
Doctor  John  Lingard,  the  eminent  Cath- 
olic divine,  whose  history  of  England  is 
familiar  to  most  of  our  readers,  seems  to 
have  had  a  secret  conviction  in  his  soul  that 
the  Adrian  Bull  was  spurious.  Of  course  as 
an  Englishman,  and  writing  for  the  English 
people,  it  could  never  be  entertained  by  the 
intolerant  element  among  that  race  that 
Lingard  should  be  permitted  to  proclaim 
that  England's  title  to  Ireland  was  based 
upon  a  bogus  Bull  and  an  unjust  and  brutal 
invasion  of  the  country  of  a  peaceable  na- 
tion. Lingard,  therefore,  was  compelled  to 
keep  within  the  bounds  of  mental  reserva- 
tion any  doubts  he  may  have  had,  but  when 
he  speaks  of  Pope  Adrian  "smiling"  at 
Henry's  hypocrisy,  this  expression  clearly 
indicates  that  the  historian  could  scarcely 
believe  that  such  a  Pope  would  grant  a  do- 
nation of  Ireland  to  such  a  double-dyed 
villain  aa  Henry  the  Second  was  in  all  his 
relations  with  the  Catholic  Church.  Here  is 
Dr.  Lingard's  account  of  the  invasion  of 
Ireland  by  the  Norman  adventurers  : 

The  proximity  of  Ireland  to  England,  and  the 
inferiority  of  the  natives  in  the  art  of  war,  had 
suggested  the  idea  of  conquest  to  both  William 
the  Conqueror  and  the  first  Henry.  *  •  *  Within 
a  few  months  after  bis  (Henry  II. 's)  coronation, 
John  of  Salisbury,  a  learned  monk,  and  after- 
wards Bishop  of  Chartres,f  was  dispatched  to 
solicit  the  approbation  of  Pope  Adrian*  The 

t Twenty  yean  "afterward." 
^Salisbury  says  he  himself  procured  the  Bull 
at  **  hit  own  requett" 


envoy  was  charged  to  assure  hi*  Holiness  that 
Henry's  principal  object  was  to  provide  instruc- 
tion for  an  ignorant  people,  to  extirpate  vbe 
from  the  Lord's  vineyard,  and  to  extend  to  Ire- 
land the  annual  payment  of  Peter-Pence,  but 
that,  as  every  Christian  island  was  the  property 
of  the  Holy  See,  he  did  not  presume  to  make  the 
attempt  without  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
successor  of  St.  Peter.  The  Pontiff  who  mutt 
hare  tmiled  at  the  hypocrisy  of  this  addrest, 
praised  in  his  reply  the  piety  of  his  dutiful  son  ; 
accepted  the  asserted  right  of  sovereignty  which 
had  been  so  liberally  admitted,  expressed  the 
satisfaction  with  which  he  assented  to  the  King's 
rt  quest,  and  exhorted  him  to  bear  in  mind 
the  conditions  on  which  the  assent  had  been 
grounded. 

This  is  a  very  plausible  presentation  of  the 
case  from  an  English  standpoint.  Now  let 
us  see  how  far  the  statements  of  Dr.  Lin- 
gard will  serve  to  show  the  authenticity  of 
the  Adrian  Bull,  or,  on  the  other  hand, 
help  in  the  good  work  of  exposing  this  gi- 
gantic fraud  of  the  twelfth  century. 

King  Henry  the  Second  of  England,  was 
crowned  King  at  Westminster,  December 
19th,  1154.  "  Within  a  few  months  after 
his  coronation,"  says  Dr.  Lingard,  John  of 
Salisbury  was  dispatched  to  solicit  the  ap- 
probation of  Pope  Adrian  to  King  Henry's 
intended  invasion  of  Ireland.  The  infer- 
ence is  drawn  from  the  remaining  text 
printed  above  that  the  Pope  gave  John  of 
Salisbury  a  letter  addressed  to  "the  King 
of  England,"  but  without  mentioning  any 
name.  Then  Dr.  Lingard  continues  : 

At  the  following  Michaelmas  a  great  Council 
was  held  to  deliberate  on  the  enterprise  ;  but  a 
strong  opposition  was  made  by  the  Empress 
Mother  and  the  barons  :  other  projects  offered 
themselves  to  Henry's  ambition,  and  the  Papal 
letter  was  consigned  to  oblivion  in  the  Archives 
of  the  Castle  of  Winchester. 

If  Lingard  is  correct,  therefore,  in  saying 
that  Pope  Adrian's  Bull  was  received  by 
John  of  Salisbury,  prior  to  Michaelmas, 
1155,  that  letter  could  not  have  been  the 
Bull  which  is  printed  in  Maguire's  bad  book 
and  dated  1156  !  This  is  very  apparent 
when  we  come  to  consider  that  it  was  just 
as  impossible  to  exhibit  the  Adrian  Bull, 
bearing  date  1156,  before  "a  great  Coun- 
cil" held  in  1155,  as  it  was  to  present  the 
Alexander  Bull,  dated  1172,  to  a  Synod  of 
Irish  Clergy  convened  in  1171  !  Yet  both 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


83 


of  these  seemingly  impossible  feats  were  ac- 
tually accomplished — if  we  are  to  believe 
English  historians  and  their  silly  American 
copyists  ! 

Well,  indeed,  may  Lingard  call  this 
strange  and  spurious  Bull  of  Adrian  IV.,  a 
"singular  negotiation,"  and  aptly  does  the 
same  writer  express  the  sentiments  of  the 
majority  of  our  readers  when  he  says  that 
"the  Pope  must  have  smiled  at  the  hypo- 
crisy of  King  Henry's  address,"  when  ask- 
ing him  for  the  donation  of  Ireland  ! 

In  a  foot-note  to  the  page  from  which  the 
foregoing  extracts  are  culled,  Dr.  Lingard 
shows  that  he  had  serious  doubts  regarding 
the  genuine  character  of  the  Adrian  "letter," 
as  he  remarks  that  "  when  King  Louis  of 
France,  a  few  years  later  (1159),  meditated 
a  similar  expedition,  Pope  Adrian  refused 
his  approbation  unless  the  would-be  invader 
first  procured  the  consent  of  the  Princes, 
Bishops,  Clergy  and  people  of  Ihe  country  he 
contemplated  invading." 

We  have  said  that  the  statements  con- 
cerning the  Adrian  Bull  made  by  Dr.  Lin- 
gard lead  to  the  conclusion  that  the  spurious 
document  dated  1156,  was  issued  in  1155. 
This  doubtful  document  itself,  however, 
had  no  date  or  place  of  publication  whatever, 
when  it  first  appeared,  but  as  a  Bull  without 
a  date  or  place  of  birth  would  be  nothing 
more  than  a  nonentity  in  the  world,  several 
officious  Englishmen  have  attached  to  it  the 
year  in  which  they  thought  it  ought  to  have 
been  issued  !  But  John  of  Salisbury  never 
received  a  Bull,  or  even  a  letter  from  Pope 
Adrian  IV.,  donating  Ireland  to  King 
Henry  of  England  in  the  year  1155,  or  at 
any  other  time. 

In  another  portion  of  his  work,  Dr.  Lin- 
gard calls  attention  to  the  difference  be- 
tween Salisbury's  statement  concerning  the 
terms  of  the  Bull,  and  that  document  itself. 
Thus  :  Salisbury,  who  most  assuredly  should 
have  been  familiar  with  the  tenor  of  a  Bull 
which  he  says  was  given  "  at  his  request," 
calls  that  document  "  a  concession  of  inheri- 
tance," but  the  Adrian  Bull  contains  no 
clause  of  any  such  nature. 

Admitting  even  that  Salisbury  conveyed 
the  Papal  document  to  England,  what  use 


did  King  Henry  make  of  it?  That  mon- 
arch made  all  his  preparations  to  invade 
Ireland  and  he  went  there,  leaving  the  Salis- 
bury Bull  in  the  secret  Archives  of  Winches- 
ter Castle  !  A  sovereign  who  was  "armed" 
with  such  a  document,  would  most 
assuredly  have  carried  his  credentials  for  in- 
vading a  neighboring  country  with  him, 
but  as  Henry  did  not  do  so,  it  is  only  fair  to 
presume  that  the  spurious  Bull  had  not  yet 
been  concocted ! 

After  a  mock  funeral  and  a  mock  burial 
which  continued  for  nearly  twenty  years, 
the  Bull  (we  are  told  by  Cambrensis  and  his 
copyists)  was  read  with  great  solemnity  in  a 
Council  of  Irish  Bishops  conveniently  held 
nowhere,  on  which  Lingard  sarcastically  re- 
marks :  "  We  will  allow  ourselves  to  think 
to  what  degree  this  document  served  to 
convince  the  Prelates  that  the  King  was  the 
legitimate  sovereign  of  Ireland." 

It  is  clear,  therefore,  from  Dr.  Lingard 's 
testimony,  that  any  Pope  who  would  be  com- 
pelled to  smile  at  the  hypocrisy  of  a  mon- 
arch's petition,  would  not  be  likely  to  grant 
the  prayer  of  it.  And  it  is  also  beyond  be- 
lief that  Pope  Adrian  would  hand  over  Ire? 
land  to  a  foreign  king,  merely  because  a 
simple  Priest  casually  made  the  suggestion. 

TESTIMONY  OF    FATHER    MORRIS. 

In  his  "Life  of  St.  Patrick,"  recently 
published,  Rev.  W.  B.  Morris,  of  England, 
in  alluding  to  English-Irish  histories  of  Ire- 
land (like  that  of  O'Halloran,  alluded  to 
above),  says : 

For  seven  hundred  years  England  has  been 
before  the  world  as  spokesman  for  Ireland, 
from  the  days  of  QIRALDUS  and  MAT- 
THEW PAKIS,  the  so-called  history  of  Ireland  »« 
it  went  forth  to  the  world,  was  in  great  part 
written  for  diplomatic  purposes,  and  each  false- 
hood became  the  parent  of  a  brood. 

The  same  writer,  in  a  passing  allusion  to 
the  bogus  Adrian  Bull,  says  : 

The  spurioua  Ball  of  Adrian  IV.,  without 
name  of  sender  or  receiver,  unsigned,  unsealed, 
and  undelivered,  it  was  worthless  as  an  ecclesias- 
tical or  political  instrument.  Its  venom  and  that 
of  other  kindred  forgeries  lay  in  the  motives 
which  were  supposed  to  influence  the  Popes. 
Those  epistles,  well  worthy  of  the  title  of  False 
Decrttals,  that  condemned  the  Church  and  na- 
tion of  SS.  Cehus,  Malachy,  and  Laurence,  once 


84 


THK       POPE       AND      IRKLANH. 


entrenched  in  the  page B  vf  the  Court  historians 
of  Henry  II..  became  the  text  of  honest  sat  well 
M  dishonest  writer*  in  subsequent  centuries. 

There  are  several  other  writers  from 
whose  works  we  also  could  extract  testimony 
of  the  same  character  aa  that  which  we  have 
from  the  authorities  already  quoted, 


and  all  tending  to  show  the  fraudulent 
character  of  both  the  Adrian  and  Alexander 
Bulls,  but  we  think  the  testimony  already 
produced  is  sufficient  to  satisfy  our  readers 
on  that  point,  hence  we  will  introduce  an- 
other aspect  of  this  historical  question  in 
the  next  chapter. 


CHAPTER      XIV. 


Evidence  of  the  Fraudulent  Character  of  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls.—  An 
An  iljsis  of  the  Text  of  Each.  —  Criticisms  Proving  their  Fictitious  Origin.—  New 
Light  on  the  Great  Forgery  of  the  Twelfth  Century. 


Now  that  we  have  presented  our  readers 
with  a  vast  amount  of  extrinsic  proof  clear- 
ly and  conclusively  demonstrating  the 
dpurious  character  of  the  Adrian  and  Alex- 
ander Bulls,  let  us  introduce  these  docu- 
ments themselves  in  evidence,  carefully 
analyze  their  contents,  and  thereby  add 
additional  strength  to  the  proof  already 
adduced  against  the  possibility  of  their  ever 
having  emanated  from  the  Popes  of  Rome 
whose  names  they  bear. 

Before  doing  this,  however,  there  are  a 
few  matters  of  general  interest  concerning 
these  documents,  the  knowledge  of  which 
will  give  our  readers  a  fuller  insight  into 
the  fact  that  both  the  Adrian  and  Alexander 
Bulls  were  forged  by  one  and  the.  tame  per- 
aoit.  This  assertion  is  borne  out  by  the 
following  somewhat  singular  coincidences 
when  it  is  known  that  there  are  sixteen  years 
difference  in  their  dates. 

Both  Bulls  are  similar  in  title,  and  both 
omit  the  name  of  the  person  to  whom  they 
were  supposed  to  be  addressed.  Both  Bui  s 
—  when  first  published— had  neither  place, 
date  nor  year  to  designate  the  city  from 
which  they  were  promulgated,  the  time  of 
their  publication,  or  the  name  of  the  persi  u 
for  whom  they  were  intended. 

Both  Bulls  mention  the  "Peter-pence 
collection,"  although  the  Adrian  Bull  is 
supposed  to  be  sixteen  years  older  than  the 
Alexander  fabrication,  and  it  would  require 
in  -re  than  ordinary  credulity  to  believe  that 
Pope  Alexander  would  reiterate  the 
"  Peter-pence  collection"  in  a  Bull  issued 


in  1172,  when  he  must  have  been  well  aware 
that  not  a  cent  had  ever  be<  n  jj<tid  in  re- 
sponse to  a  Bull  supposed  to  have  been 
issued  somewhere  about  the  years  1151,  1154 
or  1156  by  Pope  Adrian  the  Fourth. 

B  ,th  Bulls  manifest  a  most  malignant 
hatred  towards  the  ever-faithful  Catholic 
people  of  Ireland,  a  hatred  which  could 
never  have  lodged  in  the  mind  of  any 
Prelate  who  ever  held  the  supereminent 
position  of  Vicar  of  Christ.  These  spurious 
documents,  issued  in  the  twelfth  century, 
speak  precisely  in  the  same  strain  of  slander 
concerning  the  "ignorance,"  "rudeness," 
'•viciousness,"  and  "disobedience  to  laws'' 
of  the  Irish  people,  as  the  London  Times 
and  all  the  other  Irish-hating  newspapers 
of  England  and  elsewhere  have  constantly 
employed  in  portraying  the  "difficulty" 
which  they  experienced  in  the  way  of 
"settling  the  Irish  question"  during  the 
past  eighty- eight  years. 

The  tone  of  both  these  Bulls  is  thorough- 
ly anti-Catholic  and  British,  and  although 
Pope  Adrian  can  be  accused  of  being  an 
Englishman,  no  such  charge  can  be  brnught 
against  Pope  Alexander,  yet  the  hatied  of 
the  Catholic  people  of  Ireland  which  the 
forger  injected  into  the  spurious  Alexander 
K>dl,  is  even  more  intense,  ferocious  and 
foul  than  the  denunciations  fulminated  in 
the  fraudulent  document  attributed  to 
Pope  Adrian  IV. 


lu   addition    to   the  anti-Papal   tone    of 
these  documents,  as  well  as  the  omission  of 


THE      POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


85 


very  important  features,  without  which  no 
Vatican  diploma  can  be  considered  complete 
or  possessed  of  official  ecclesiastical  authority, 
we  also  desire  to  call  the  attention  of  our 
readers  to  the  fact  that  in  the  B'dlariinn 
Koin  mum  (the  volume  which  contains  the 
Latin  text  of  not  only  the  yi-.iiuine  Bulls 
isssued  by  the  different  Popes  -but  also 
such  as  may  have  been  attributed  to  them) 
— there  are  upwards  of  twenty  documents 
which  we  will  now  proceed  to  classify  in 
order  to  show  that  the  spurious  Bull  by 
which  King  Henry  and  his  successors  on  the 
English  throne  laid  claim  to  Ireland,  was 
fabricated  deliberately  for  the  purpose  of 
making  a  false  claim  to  that  island. 

From  the  volume  of  the  Bullarium  lio- 
ifKtnum  under  examination  we  glean  the 
following  very  important  evidence  : 

All  the  genuine  Bulls  attributed  to  Pope 
Adrian  IV.  give  the  years  and  the  date  of 
the  month,  in  which  they  were  issued. 

[The  spurious  Bull  is  without  bothj. 

All  the  genuine  Bulls  are  attested  as  hav- 
ing been  issued  from  some  certain  city  or 
place,  such  as  Rome,  Castellana  Civitas, 
Civita  Vecohia,  Benevento,  Lateran,  Etc. 

[The  doubtful  "donation"  Bull  is  entire- 
ly defective  in  this  regard.] 

All  the  genuine  Bulls  bear  the  proper 
official  attestation  of  their  ecclesiastical 
character  thus : 

Given  at  St  Peter's,  Rome,  by  the  hands 
of  Roland,  Cardinal  Priest  and  Chancellor 
of  the  Holy  Roman  Church,  on  the  7th  of 
the  kalends  of  March,  in  the  3rd  indiction, 
1155th  5  ear  since  the  Incarnation  of  the 
Lord,  and  in  the  first  year  of  the  Pontificate 
of  our  Lord  Pope  Adrian  IV. 

OK  THUS: 

Given  at  Civita  Vecchia  by  the  hands  of 
Roland,  Cardinal  Priest  and  Chancellor  of 
the  Holy  Roman  Church,  in  the  year  of  the 
Incarnation  of  the  Lord  U55,  5th  indiction, 
3rd  of  the  month  of  October,  and  second 
year  of  our  Lord  Pope  Adrian  IV. 

[The  fictitious  "donation"  document, 
fraudulently  concocted  and  forged  by  order 
of  King  Henry  II.  of  England,  contains  no 
name  whatever  of  Cardinal  or  Chancellor, 
no  date,  no  month,  no  place,  and  no  allu- 
sion to  the  year  of  its  issuance  or  the  era  of 


the  Pontificate  of  any  Pope  that  ever  suc- 
ceeded St.  Peter !] 

All  the  genuine  Bulls  have  the  names  <-f 
the  individuals  to  whom  they  are  addressed 
set  forth  in  full  after  these  forms  : 

"ADRIAN,  Bishop,  Servant  of  the  iSer- 
vants  of  God,  to  his  venerable  Brother 
HENRY,  Patriarch  of  Graden,  to  his  Canon- 
ical successors  for  ever." 

"ADRIAN,  Bishop,  Servant  of  the  Ser- 
vants of  God  to  his  beloved  Sons  ANM  s 
Arch  priest  of  the  Church  of  Bellunus,  and 
to  his  Brothers,  present  and  to  come,  to  be 
substituted  according  to  the  Canons  for 
ever." 

[The  bogus  Bull  concocted  by  King 
Henry  II.  of  England,  omits  entirely  to 
name  "  the  beloved  son"  to  whom  thespuii- 
ous  document  was  supposed  to  have  been 
addressed !] 

All  the  genuine  Bulls,  with  the  exception 
of  four,  are  not  only  signed  by  Pope  Adrian 
IV.,  but  are  also  attested  by  several  of  the 
Cardinals  as  well.  Some  of  the  Consistorial 
Bulls  have  the  names  of  six  Cardinals  at- 
tached and  others  are  signed  by  fourteen 
Cardinals.  The  Bulls  signed  only  by  the 
Pope  conclude  thus : 

"  I,  ADRIAN,  Bishop  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  have  subscribed."  Then  follows 
the  Pope's  seal,  and,  on  the  left  hand  cor- 
ner :  Given  &c.  &c. 

[  The  bogus  Bull  King  Henry  concocted 
has  neither  the  Pontifical  signature  nor  the 
Pope^sseal,  nor  does  it  pretend  to  have  ever 
emanated  from  any  special  person  or  from 
any  particular  place  !] 


Among  the  documents  in  the  Bullarium 
Romanum,  the  editor  of  the  edition  of  1739 
introduces  a  Letter  supposed  to  have  eman- 
ated from  Pope  Adrian  IV.  to  some  English 
King,  no  name  of  said  British  monarch 
being  given.  The  compiler  of  these  ecclesi- 
astical documents  ia  careful,  however,  to 
cast  off  all  responsibility -for  the  genuine- 
ness of  this  document  from  his  own  should- 
ers, by  printing  a  footnote  to  the  page  on 
which  the  spurious  document  is  printed,  in 
which  he  says  that  it  is  given  only  on  the 
authority  of  the  falsifying  Giraldus  Cam- 
brensis,  and  the  unreliable  Matthew  of 
Paris.  The  document  in  question  is  the 


86 


THE       POPE       AND       IHELAND. 


bogus  Bull  whose  defects  and  omissions  we 
have  already  carefully  defined  and  exposed. 


Let  us  now  turn  to  another  volume, 
namely  the  Patrologia  of  Migne,*  where- 
in may  be  consulted  two  hundred  and 
forty-seven  documents  which  are  attributed 
to  Pope  Adrian  IV.  Of  these  some  are 
fragments,  and  all  are  papers  of  transitory 
importance,  the  originals  of  which  it  was 
not  necessary  to  preserve,  whereas  the  so- 
called  "Bull,"  which  we  have  now  under 
consideration,  was  King  Henry's  title-deed 
to  an  entire  kingdom. 

It  is  also  to  be  remarked  that  in  each  and 
every  one  of  these  documents  (with  the 
exception  of  the  unaddressed,  unsigned  and 
evidently  spurious  "  Bull"),  we  find  an 
intelligible,  legal  statement  of  the  subject 
matter,  with  the  proper  names,  titles  and 
addresses  of  the  persons  concerned. 

The  libraries  and  archives  of  Italy,  Ger- 
many, France,  Spain,  England,  Scotland, 
Poland  and  Greece,  in  fact  of  every  then 
Christian  country,  except  Ireland,  have  de- 
livered up  their  evidence  to  the  active  and 
powerful  administration  of  Pope  Adrian  IV. 
for  insertion  in  this  work,  and  each  docu- 
ment, whether  complete  or  mutilated, 
bears  the  stamp  of  that  jealous  defence  of 
the  established  rights  of  the  Church  which 
is  seen  in  so  marked  a  manner  in  all  the 
writings  of  this  Pontiff,  and  to  all  of  which 
the  spurious  Bull  fabricated  by  Kins; 
Henry's  order  forms  such  a  marked  con- 
trast. 


Leaving  aside  and  entirely  out  of  consid- 
eration, however,  any  of  the  "foregoing 
reasons  for  refusing  to  acknowledge  the 
genuine  character  of  the  Adrian  and  Alex- 
ander Bulls,  let  us  call  the  attention  of  our 
readers  to  the  natural  equity  of  the  case 
under  consideration,  and  ask  :  What  proof 
has  ever  been  adduced  that  these  Popes 
ever  issued  these  documents  ?  None. 
What  Cardinal  or  Roman  Chancellor  ever 
attested  to  these  as  Vatican  documents? 
Not  one.  What  Irish  Prelates  have  ad- 
mitted them  to  be  genuine  I  Not  one.  Is 
it  possible,  therefore,  that  any  Pope  could  is- 

*  Vol.  188:  C.L.XXXVIII. 


sue  so  important  a  document  without  it  being 
known  in  Rome  or  ever  acknowledged  by 
the  Hierarchy  of  Ireland  as  the  work  of  the 
Holy  Father  ?  These  Bulls  have  been  pro- 
nounced false  by  Prelates,  Priests  and  the 
Irish  people,  and  they— as  the  parties  most 
interested — are  the  best  judges  in  the  case. 

In  making  a  critical  examination  of  the 
Bull  attributed  to  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  the 
first  question  that  naturally  arises  is : 
Would  King  Henry  IL  have  hesitated  to 
perpetrate  such  an  outrageous  forgery? 
Let  us  answer  this  question  by  undoubted 
evidence.  No  man  who  lived  contempor- 
aneously with  Henry  Plantaganet  knew 
him  more  intimately  than  Cambrensis,  and 
this  is  the  character  this  conspirator  against 
truth  gives  of  that  master  of  diplomatic 
duplicity: 

"  By  a  certain  natural  inconstancy  he  was  a 
transgressor  of  his  word,  lor  as  often  as  he  got 
into  a  tight  place  or  difficulty,  he  preferred  to 
repent  of  his  word  rather  than  of  his  act,  and  he 
more  readily  nullified  his  word  than  hid  act."+ 

The  plain  meaning  of  this  extract  is  that 
beneath  a  deceptive  exterior,  there  beat  in 
Henry's  breast  a  heart  that  was  capable  of 
descending  to  the  vilest  artifices,  and  of 
sporting  with  his  honor  and  his  veracity.  No 
person  could  rely  upon  his  word  or  place 
any  confidence  whatever  in  his  promises. 
He  justified  his  natural  passion  for  duplicity 
by  the  maxim  that  in  order  to  carry  out  his 
nefarious  schemes  it  was  better  to  break  his 
word  and  sully  his  honor  than  to  fail  in 
reaching  the  goal  of  his  ambition. 

This  double-dealing  and  chicanery  was  so 
marked  a  trait  in  King  Henry's  character 
that  Cardinal  Vivian — who  knew  him  in- 
timately and  long — pays  him  this  not  very 
flattering  compliment :  "I have  never  seen 
a  man  lie  so  audaciously."^  "His  anger 
was  that  of  a  mad  man  ;  his  fury  that  of  a 
wild  beast.  "+  The  other  venal  traits  of 
Henry's  character  have  already  been  well 
described  previously  so  now  we  will  turn 
again  to  the  forged  document  itself. 


Having    thus    given  our  readers  a  gen- 
eral insight  into  some  of  the  fatal  defects  of 

t  Opp.  V.  p.  p.  304. 

fEpibt  St.   Thomas,   3-6.     +  EpUt   66.  715, 
Peter  de  Biois. 


THE       POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


87 


the  Adrian  Bull,  we  might  stop  right  here 
and  rest  our  case,  as  we  have  already  ad- 
duced evidence  sufficient  to  prove  to  every 
intelligent  and  impartial  reader  that  Pope 
Adrian  never  saw  or  heard  of  such  a  docu- 
ment as  that  forged  and  fraudulently  circu- 
lated by  certain  disreputable  hirelings  of  the 
second  King  Henry  of  England.  But  in 
order  that  not  a  loop-hole  may  be  left 
wherein  any  captious  anti  Catholic  scribe  of 
the  future  can  hang  a  doubt,  we  will  now 
place  this  spurious  document  on  the  MONI- 
TOR'S dissecting  table  and  disjoint  it  for  the 
edification  of  our  readers. 

THE   SO  CALLED    ADRIAN    BULL 

as  copied  from  Cambrensis  by  the  historian 
Leland,  that  being  the  original  copy  of  this 
doubtful  document.     This  notorious  fabri- 
cation begins  with  this  sentence  : 
"ADRIAN,  bishop,  servant  of  the  servants  of 
God,  to  his  dearest  son  in  Christ, 
the    illustrious  king  of    England, 
greeting,    and   apostolic    benedic- 
tion." 

It  will  be  observed  that  this  Bull  is  ad- 
dressed to  no  person  in  particular.  "  The 
king  of  England"  is  an  unmeaning  title 
when  the  Pope  calls  that  personage  "  his 
dearest  Son  in  Christ,"  as,  in  the  twelfth 
century,  it  took  a  couple  of  months  to  travel 
from  Rome  to  England,  and  "the  king" 
for  whom  the  Bull  was  intended,  might  die 
while  the  Bull  was  in  course  of  preparation 
and  transition,  and  another  king  or  queen 
even,  might  ascend  the  English  throne  in 
the  interval. 

Rome  is  far  too  wise  to  risk  the  occur- 
rence of  any  such  misapplication  of  so  im- 
portant a  document  as  a  genuine  Bull,  by 
omitting  the  name  of  the  individual  in 
whose  interest  or  for  whose  information, 
guidance  or  instruction,  it  may  have  been 
promulgated.  Hence,  even  in  the  very  in- 
iatory  passage  of  the  spurious  document 
under  consideration,  there  occurs  an  omis- 
sion that,  of  itself,  furnishes  sufficient 
evidence  that  the  forged  instrument,  which 
was  first  published  by  the  untruthful  Cam- 
brensis, came  from  an  evil  source,  was 
manufactured  for  a  most  malicious  purpose 
and  was  never  suggested,  accorded,  signed, 
sealed  nor  delivered  by  the  Pope  who  reigned 
in  the  bee  of  St.  Peter  under  the  pontifical 
title  of  Adrian  IV. 


FIRST   PARAGRAPH    OF   THE   SPURIOUS    BULL. 

Full  laudably  and  profitably  hath  your  mag- 
nificence conceived  the  design  of  propagating 
your  glorious  renown  on  earth,  and  completing 
your  reward  of  eternal  happiness  in  heaven  ; 
while,  as  a  Catholic  prince,  you  are  intent  on 
enlarging  the  borders  of  the  Church,  teaching 
the  truth  of  the  Christian  faith  to  the  ignorant 
and  rude,  exterminating  the  roots  of  vice  from 
the  field  of  the  Lord,  and  for  the  more  con- 
venient execution  of  this  purpose,  requiring  the 
counsel  and  favor  of  the  apostolic  see.  In 
which,  the  maturer  your  deliberation,  and  the 
greater  the  discretion  of  your  procedure,  by 
so  much  the  happier  we  trust,  will  be  your  pro- 
gress, with  the  assistance  of  the  Lord ;  as  all 
things  are  used  to  come  to  a  prosperous  end  and 
issue,  which  take  their  beginning  from  the  ar- 
dour of  faith  and  the  love  of  religion. 

The  document  from  which  the  foregoing 
extract  is  made  was  supposed  to  have  been  is- 
sued in  the  year  1151-4-5  or. 6.  Let  us  ad- 
mit that  it  was  written  in  1156,  less  than  two 
years  after  Henry  became  King,  and  during 
which  time  he  did  nothing  of  a  beneficial 
nature  that  would  entitle  him  to  the  eulogy 
of  having  achieved  any  "  glorious  renown" 
whatever.  Later  on  in  the  reign  of  King 
Henry,  when  he  had  invaded  Ireland  and 
had  defeated  his  enemies  in  Scotland,  there 
might  be  some  truth  in  saying  that  King 
Henry  had  gained  "  glorious  renown,"  but 
such  a  laudatory  phrase  could  never  have 
been  used  by  Pope  Adrian  in  alluding  to 
that  English  monarch  even  as  long  as  two 
years  after  his  occupancy  of  the  English 
throne. 


Neither  Popes,  Bishops  nor  Priests  ever 
assume  that  any  living  man's  salvation  is 
secure,  even  though  that  individual  may  be 
King  of  England.  God's  fiat  alone  fixes 
that.  Invading  Ireland — even  for  the  pur- 
pose of  reforming  "  the  ignorant  and  rude" 
Irish — could  not  add  a  feather's  weight  to- 
wards completing  King  Henry's  "reward  of 
eternal  happiness  in  Heaven."  Almighty 
God  never  blesses  injustice,  nor  does  the 
Catholic  Church  canonize  those  who  per- 
petrate it.  Hence,  when  the  forger  so  for- 
cibly asserted  the  saintly  character  of  Henry, 
and  claimed  that  his  invasion  of  Ireland 
would  "  complete"  that  monarch's  "reward 
of  eternal  happiness,"  he  disclosed  the 
cloven  foot  of  King  Henry's  amanuensis 


88 


THE       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


beneath  the  cloak  of  some  pretended  official 
of  the  Vatican. 


King  Henry,  we  are  plausibly  told  in 
the  foregoing  first  paragraph  of  the  ficti- 
tious Adrian  Bull,  was  "intent  on  enlarg- 
ing the  borders  of  the  Church"  in  Ireland, 
hut  how  could  this  be  possible  ?  Pope 
Adrian  knew  full  well  (but  the  forger  did 
not)  that  the  Catholic  Church  occupied  all 
Ireland ;  his  Holiness  was  well  aware  that 
heresy  had  never  raised  its  hideous  head  in 
that  notable  holy  Island  ;  and  the  Vicar  of 
Christ  had  hundreds  of  pilgrims  from  Ireland 
to  visit  him  every  year  who  could  tell  him 
with  truth  that  Ireland's  heart  beat  constant- 
ly in  unison  with  that  of  the  Vicar  of  Christ 
— whether  the  Pontiff  was  called  Celestine 
or  Adrian  1  In  the  reign  of  Pope  Adrian 
IV.,  Ireland  was  the  daughter  and  Rome 
was  the  Mother,  just  as  that  lovely  land 
of  Catholic  missionaries  is  to-day  under  the 
glorious  Pontificate  of  Pope  Leo  XIII.  No 
schism  has  ever  separated  Rome  and  Ire- 
land. The  golden  chain  of  Catholic  Faith 
whose  first  link  was  forged  by  St.  Patrick, 
on  Tara's  historic  hill,  has  been  growing, 
link  by  link,  as  centuries  have  rolled  on, 
until,  at  the  present  day,  the  chain  of  filial 
love  and  Catholic  faith  not  only  binds  to 
Rome  the  people  of  Ireland,  but  also  the 
tens  of  millions  of  those  Irish  exiles,  their 
children  and  their  children's  children,  who 
dwell  in  every  continent  of  the  world  and 
on  every  island  throughout  the  universe  ! 

There  never  has  been  a  time,  therefore, 
when  any  Pope  could  justly  commission  a 
licentious  layman  with  a  wife  and  an  illicit 
lady-love,  known  as  Fair  Rosamond,  to  go 
over  to  Ireland  to  "  enlarge  the  borders  of 
the  Church"  that  was  already  universal  on  the 
Island,  or  to  "  exterminate  the  roots  of 
vice  from  the  field  of  the  Lord"  where  no 
genus  of  the  weeds  of  heresy  or  Protestantism 
ever  prospered  I 


What  "  vices"  did  Henry  discover  in  Ire- 
l.ind  which  he  found  it  necessary  to  exter- 
minate ?  In  answering  this  question  it  is 
amusing  to  notice  the  "vices"  which  both 
vicious  English  historians  and  Irish  writers 
under  English  pay,  set  forth  as  so  many 
black  spots  on  the  character  of 'the  Irish 


people.  It  was  only  in  1152— four  years 
before  the  latest  date  of  the  forged  Adrian 
Bull — that  Cardinal  Paparon,  as  the  Legate 
of  Pope  Eugenius  III.,  had  visited  Ireland. 
Three  thousand  ecclesiastics  assembled  by 
his  direction  in  the  town  of  Drogheda  ;  * 
four  Palliums  were  conferred  on  the  Arch- 
bishops of  Armagh,  Cashel,  Dublin  and 
Tuam;  the  celebration  of  Easter  was  settled 
in  accordance  with  the  Pontiff's  desire,  and 
all  the  affairs  of  the  Church  in  Ireland  were 
most  amicably  arranged  to  the  entire  satisfac- 
tion of  both  the  Papal  Legate  and  the  three 
thousand  Archbishops,  Bishops,  Abbots, 
and  the  great  body  of  the  Regular  and  Se- 
cular Clergy  who  met  on  that  memorable 
occasion ! 

Are  we  to  believe,  therefore,  that  in  four 
short  years,  the  successor  of  Pope  Eugenius 
IIL  could  write  to  an  English  layman  of 
immoral  character  that  the  "  borders  of  the 
Church"  in  Ireland  needed  "  enlarging," 
or  that  it  was  necessary  for  a  layman  to  go 
over  to  Ireland  in  order  to  "teach  the  truth 
of  the  Christian  faith"  in  a  land  not  one- 
fifth  of  the  size  of  California,  in  which  there 
were  three  thousand  Catholic  ecclesiastics, 
and  each  of  them  in  complete  religious  har- 
mony with  the  Vicar  of  Christ  in  Rome  ? 


When  our  Blessed  Redeemer  selected  his 
Apostles  they  were  laymen,  but  before  He 
sent  them  to  "  teach  all  nations,"  He  filled 
them  with  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and 
consecrated  them  specially  to  His  service. 
And  again,  when  Pope  Celestine  selected 
St.  Patrick  to  be  the  Apostle  of  Ireland  he 
consecrated  him  a  Bishop.  Yet  in  the  face 
of  these  prominent  precedents,  we  are  asked 
to  believe  that  Pope  Adrian  selected  a  lay- 
man of  loose  morals  and  lax  religious  fer- 
vor, to  "enlarge"  the  Catholic  Church  in  a 
l*nd  where  it  was  universal,  and  to  "  teach 
the  true  faith"  to  a  people  whose  fellow- 
countrymen  had  helped  to  bring  all  Europe 
into  the  one  true  fold  of  Christ  !  Those 
persons  who  try  to  believe  such  a  superla- 
tively ridiculous  proposition  as  that  Pope 
Adrian  ever  commissioned  King  Henry  to 
"  convert"  Ireland,  are  merely  the  dupes  of 
their  own  ignorance  or  their  intense  hatred 


"Ireland'*  History  of  Ireland,  Vol.  I.,  p.  8. 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


89 


of  Ireland  and   the  Catholic  Church  com- 
bined. 


So  far  from  the  Church  in  Ireland  need- 
ing "reforming"  in  the  year  1156,  there 
was  no  country  in  the  world  where  it  was 
better  organized.  The  Archbishop  of 
Armagh  had  ten  Suffragan  Bishops  under 
him ;  the  Archbishop  of  Dublin  had  live  ; 
the  Archbishop  of  Cashel  had  twelve,  and 
the  Archbishop  of  Tuam  had  seven  Suffra- 
gans. Christian  O'Conarchi,  Bishop  of  Lis- 
more,  was  Pope  Adrian's  Irish  Legate ; 
the  saintly  Gelasius  (subsequently  canon- 
ized) was  Primate  ;  and  in  every  portion  of 
that  Island  of  Saints  the  sweet  breath  of 
God's  blessing  rested  on  the  religious  labors 
of  Priests,  Sisters  and  people  alike  !  Ab- 
beys and  monasteries  dotted  every  hill  and 
valley  from  Antrim  to  Kerry  and  from 
Down  to  Mayo,  and,  when  we  recall  the 
fact  that  neither  King  Henry  nor  one  of 
his  hireling  satellites  ever  enlarged  "  the 
borders  of  the  Church  in  Ireland '  by  a 
hair's  breadth,  nor  "  taught  the  truth  of 
the  Christian  faith"  to  anybody ;  nor  ex- 
terminated a  single  "  vice"  from  that  most 
Roman,  most  Catholic  and  most  Papal  land 
in  all  the  world — it  is  fair  to  conclude  that 
Pope  Adrian  never  sent  any  such  message 
to  King  Henry,  especially  when  the  Church 
in  Ireland  was  under  the  ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction  of  a  Papal  Legate,  four  Arch- 
bishops and  thirty-four  Bishops,  assisted  by 
2,961  Ecclesiastics  of  every  rank  known  to 
the  Catholic  Church.  These  facts  also  fur- 
nish strong  evidence  of  the  fictitious  na- 
ture of  the  miscalled  Adrian  Bull. 


SECOND    PARAGRAPH  OF    THE  SPURIOUS  BULL. 

There  is  indeed  no  doubt  but  that  Ireland, 
and  all  the  islands  on  which  Christ  the  son  of 
righteousness  hath  shone,  and  which  have  re- 
ceived the  doctrines  of  the  Christian  faith,  do 
belong  to  the  jurisdiction  of  St.  Peter,  and  of 
the  Holy  Roman  Church,  as  your  excellency 
also  doth  acknowledge.  And,  therefore,  we  are 
the  more  solicitous  to  propagate  the  righteous 
plantation  of  faith  in  this  land,  and  the  branch 
acceptable  to  God,  as  we  have  the  secret  con- 
viction of  conscience  that  this  is  more  especially 
our  bounden  duty. 

The  English  forger  who  concocted  the 
foregoing  extract  makes  Pope  Adrian  say 


something  which  no  Pope— either  before 
or  since  the  Pontificate  of  Adrian  IV. — 
ever  uttered. 

Let  us  now  put  this  paragraph  in  the 
spurious  Bull  to  the  crucial  test  which  truth 
possesses  for  all  such  fabrications,  and  the 
first  important  discovery  we  make  discloses 
the  fact  that  Christianity  had  no  part  what- 
ever in  the  island  possessions  alluded  to 
therein,  for  the  potent  reason  that  the 
power  of  Constantine,  in  his  political  rela- 
tions, were  precisely  the  same  in  Pagan 
islands  as  well  as  in  those  whose  inhabi- 
tants had  embraced  Christianity.  Pope 
Adrian  of  course,  was  well  aware  of  this 
fact,  hence  it  is  an  insult  to  his  erudition, 
experience  and  well-known  diplomatic 
genius— to  assert  that  he  ever  wrote  such 
an  absurd  paragraph  as  the  above. 

Again,  it  is  well-known  that  Constantine 
had  no  control  whatever  over  any  islands 
save  those  that  were  attached  to,  or  de- 
pended on,  his  Empire.  Was  Ireland  such 
an  island  ?  Most  assuredly  not  !  The  Ro- 
mans neither  conquered  Ireland  nor  is  there 
a  chart  or  map  extant  which  shows  it  to 
have  been  within  the  territorial  boundaries 
of  their  dominions.  This  very  important 
fact  must  have  been  familiar  to  Constantine, 
who  passed  much  of  his  time  in  insular 
Britain,  and  the  fact  was  also  equally  well 
known  to  Pope  Adrian,  although  the  Eng- 
lishman who  forged  this  paragraph  in  the 
bogus  Bull  seems  to  have  been  not  so  well 
posted  in  ancient  history. 

And  again,  it  is  a  fact  easily  susceptible 
of  proof  that  the  Popes  never  took  advan- 
tage of  the  donation  of  Constantine  for 
Rome,  for  the  Italian  continent,  nor  for  the 
adjacent  islands.  Those  who  have  any 
curiosity  to  test  this  assertion  can  do  so  by 
consulting  the  Letters  of  the  Codex  Caro- 
linus,  the  authenticity  of  which  is  beyond 
controversy ;  or  they  can  examine  the 
Regesta  of  St.  Gregory  the  Great,  and  then 
they  can  pore  over  the  Imperial  Diplomas 
from  the  9th  to  the  loth  centuries. 

Seeing,  therefore,  that  preceding  Popes 
refrained  from  making  use  of  the  dona- 
tion of  Constantine,  it  is  not  at  all  likely 
that  Pope  Adrian — who  was  well  skilled  in 
Canon  Law — and  very  familiar  with  all 


90 


TUB      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


Pontifical  documents  of  diplomatic  character, 
would  insert  in  a  Bull  a  statement  which 
every  official  in  the  Vatican  could  have  at 
once  pronounced  incorrect. 

We  have  already  intimated  in  our  criti- 
cism of  other  phases  of  this  spurious  Bull 
that  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  documents 
were  not  forged  until  some  time  after  1172, 
the  year  in  which  King  Henry  acknowl- 
edged the  feudal  sovereignly  of  the  Pope 
over  the  Kingdom  of  England  by  the 
oath  which  he  took  in  the  Cathedral  at 
Avranches.  The  foregoing  paragraph  con- 
firms our  opinion  on  this  point,  for  the 
reason  that  prior  to  taking  the  oath  at 
Avranches  King  Henry  could  never  have  ad- 
mitted, much  less  suggested  —  as  the  above 
paragraph  intimates — that  the  Holy  See  had 
jurisdiction  over  "  all  the  Islands,"  for  the 


very  potent  reason  that  Henry  would  there- 
by have  compromised  and  endangered  the 
Kingdom  of  England  itself  !  No  !  King 
Henry  was  too  shrewd  and  too  selfish  a 
monarch  ever  to  have  suggested  or  acknowl- 
edged to  the  Holy  See  in  the  year  1154  or 
"55,  or  '56,  that  "  all  the  Islands  *  *  *  do  be- 
long to  the  jurisdiction  of  St.  Peter  and  of 
the  Holy  Roman  Church."  Hence  it  is 
very  clear  that  the  forgery  of  the  fictitious 
Adnan  Bull  was  not  meditated  until  afttr 
King  Henry  had  taken  the  oath  at 
Avranches,  when  the  Pontiff  whose  name 
was  forged  in  the  document  had  been  dead 
for  thirteen  years  !  This  point  makes  an 
additional  link  in  the  chain  of  evidence 
which  will  help  to  convict  King  Henry  of 
having  committed  the  great  fraud  of  the 
twelfth  century. 


CHAPTER     XV. 

Intrinsic  Evidence  of  the  Fraudulent  Character  of  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls. — An 
Analysis  of  the  Text  of  Each. — Criticisms  Proving  their  Fictitious  Origin. — New 
Light  on  the  Great  Forgery  of  the  Twelfth  Century. 


THIRD  PARAGRAPH  OF  THE    ''ADRIAN      BULL. 

Yon  then,  most  dear  son  in  Christ,  have  sig- 
nified to  us  your  desire  to  enter  into  the  island  of 
Ireland,  in  order  to  reduce  the  people  to  obedi- 
ence auto  laws,  and  to  extirpate  the  plants  of 
vice  ;  and  that  you  are  willing  to  pay  from  each 
house  a  yearly  pension  of  one  penny  to  St. 
Peter,  and  that  you  will  preserve  the  rights  of 
the  churches  of  this  land  whole  and  inviolate. 
We  therefore,  with  that  grace  and  acceptance 
suited  to  your  pious  and  laudable  design,  and 
favorably  assenting  to  your  petition,  do  hold  it 
good  and  acceptable,  that,  for  extending  the 
borders  of  the  church,  restraining  the  progress  of 
vice,  for  the  correction  of  manners,  the  planting 
of  virtue,  and  the  increase  of  religion,  you  enter 
this  inland,  and  execute  therein  whatever  shall 
pertain  to  the  honor  of  God  and  the  welfare  of 
the  land  ;  and  that  the  people  of  this  land  re- 
ceive you  honorably,  and  reverence  you  as  their 
lord  :  the  rights  of  their  churches  still  remaining 
sacred  and  inviolate ;  and  saving  to  St.  Peter 
the  annual  pension  of  one  penny  from  every 
house. 

The  idea  pervading  the   first  sentence  in 


the  foregoing  paragraph  clearly  intimates 
that  Pope  Adrian  had  received  a  letter 
from  King  Henry  in  which  the  English 
monarch  "signified"  to  the  reigning  Pontiff 
his  desire  "  to  enter  into  the  island  of  Ire- 
land." The  question  naturally  arises, 
therefore,  as  to  when,  where,  and  by  whom 
was  this  letter  sent  to  the  Pope  ?  Neither 
Cambrensis  nor  any  other  English  chron- 
icler record  a  word  of  its  text ;  no  Irish, 
English  or  Continental  historian  ever  pub- 
lished it.  The  very  name  of  the  officials 
who  carried  it  to  the  Pope  (if  ever  such 
officials  existed  in  the  flesh),  have  never 
been  known  to  a  human  being  inside  or  out- 
side of  England  !  Was  this  letter  a  myth  ? 
It  looks  very  much  as  if  the  English  forger 
wanted  some  kind  of  a  document  apparently 
emanating  from  King  Henry,  whereon  to 
base  a  bogus  Bull,  and  he  very  conveniently 
inserted  in  the  spurious  document  an 
intimation  concerning  a  letter  which  had 


THE      POPE      AND      IUELAND. 


91 


no  existence  save  in  his  own  over- vivid  im- 
agination !  Thus  forgery  had  to  be  support- 
ed by  forgery,  just  as  falsehood  has  to  lean 
on  untruth  for  support. 

The  second,  or  '•  Peter- pence"  clause  of 
the  above  extract  we  have  already  devoted 
several  pages  to,  and  our  readers  are  no 
doubt  satisfied  already  on  that  point. 


LAST    PARAGRAPH     OF     THE     ADRIAN     BULL. 

If  then  you  be  resolved  to  carry  the  design  you 
have  conceived  into  effectual  execution,  study  to 
form  this  nation  to  virtuous  manners  ;  and  labor 
by  yourself,  and  others  whom  you  shall  judge 
meet  for  this  work,  in  faith,  word,  and  life,  that 
the  Church  may  be  there  adorned,  that  the  re- 
ligion of  the  Christian  faith  may  be  planted  and 
grow  up,  and  that  all  things  pertaining  to  the 
honor  cf  God,  and  the  salvation  of  souls,  be  so 
ordered  by  you,  that  you  may  be  entitled  to  the 
fulness  of  eternal  reward  from  God,  and  obtain 
a  glorious  renown  on  earth  throughout  all  ages. 

[No  date,  no  ivitnesses,  no  seal,  and  no 
signature]. 

How  the  English  forger  must  have  chuck- 
led as  he  put  the  finishing  touches  (in  the 
shape  of  the  above  paragraph)  to  the  docu- 
ment he  wrote  at  King  Henry's  dictation  ! 
He  must  have  fairly  boiled  over  with  British 
glee  at  the  successful  manner  in  which  his 
Britannic  Majesty  had  outwitted  the  Pope, 
circumvented  the  Irish  Church,  and  pulled 
the  wool  over  the  eyes  of  every  person  in 
the  whole  Christian  world  ! 

King  Henry,  the  gross  voluptuary,  the 
immoral  sensualist,  the  disgusting  dishonor- 
er of  hig  wife,  was  selected  as  the  model 
man  in  all  Europe  to  form  the  Irish  nation 
to  virtuous  manners!  Spirit  of  Christian 
Charity,  let  us  bury  our  just  indignation 
beneath  the  holy  shadow  of  thy  wings  ! 

The  world  has  read  of  "setting  a  thief  to 
catch  a  thief,"  but  we  think  this  is  the  first 
instance  on  record  where  a  royal  rake,  a 
licentious  libertine  and  a  noted  liar  was  ever 
selected  as  an  apostle  to  cany  the  typical 
palms  of  Catholic  morality  to  a  virtuous 
people!  And  persons  pretend  that  the 
Pope  of  Rome,  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  did  this? 
Never  !  The  tombs  of  the  Saints  of  Ireland 
would  open,  and  the  blessed  dead  come 
forth,  in  order  to  vindicate  the  virtue  of  Ire- 
land's sons  and  daughters  against  such  a 
vile  calumny  ! 


And  the:t,  not  satisfied  with  crowning 
himself  modeler  of  Irish  morality,  King 
Henry  had  his  amanuensis  write  that  he 
was  to  act  as  the  Pope's  substitute  in  ap- 
pointing other  men  of  his  own  choosing  to 
" adorn"  the  Irish  Church,  and  to  "plant" 
the  Christian  faith !  Shade  of  St.  Patrick, 
what  impudent  irony  !  Nice  ornaments  to 
'•'adorn"  the  Church  in  Ireland  where  the 
savage  Strongbow,  and  the  murderous  crew 
that  followed  his  blood-stained  trail  in  the 
work  of  slaughtering  the  unarmed  Irish 
people,  pilfering  their  property,  destroying 
their  churches,  robbing  religious  shrines, 
and  pulling  down  the  very  crosses  which 
Irish  Saints  had  erected  for  the  glory  of 
God! 

This  English  prince  of  putrid  character 
became— according  to  the  text  of  the  forged 
Bull— a  higher  ecclesiastical  dignitary  than 
the  Papal  Legate  in  Ireland  !  Henry  was 
the  spiritual  superior  of  the  whole  Irish 
Hierarchy  !  The  2,963  Regular  and  Secu- 
lar priests  then  in  Ireland,  became  merely 
puppets  in  the  hands  of  this  self -elected 
Papal  Patriarch  of  the  British  Isles  ! 

Now  is  it  possible  that  human  credulity 
is  so  pliable  as  to  be  stretched  to  that  ten- 
sion where  people  can  be  made  to  believe 
that  any  Pope  of  Rome  ever  gave  a  mal- 
odorous monarch  such  ecclesiastical  powers 
in  the  Church  of  God  ?  Three  or  four  years 
previously  the  same  Pope  -  who  is  said  to 
have  made  Henry  his  Vice-gerent  for  the 
purpose  of  "  planting"  faith  and  virtue  in 
Ireland— sent  Cardinal  Paparo  over  to  that 
portion  of  the  flock  of  Christ,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  honoring  the  Hierarchy  by  confer- 
ring the  pallium  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction 
upon  four  of  their  number !  Is  it  not 
passingly  strange  that  Pope  Adrian  should 
show  such  filial  affection  for  the  Irish 
Church  in  1152,  and  then— three  or  four 
years  later — ask  a  lascivious  English  lay- 
man to  invade  Ireland  so  that  the  "Island 
of  Saints"  and  the  "  Mother  of  Catholic 
Missionaries,"  might  be  "formed  to  vir- 
tuous manners"  and  "  Christian  faith  plant- 
ed" in  the  land  of  the  glorious  St.  Patrick, 
St.  Columbkille,  and  hundreds  of  other 
saintly  Irishmen  who  were  Apostles  of 
Christianity  in  every  portion  of  the  world  ! 


92 


Till:       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


It  would  ba  a  vile  calumny  on  the  character 
of  the  Vicar  of  Christ  to  think  for  a  mo- 
ment that  Pope  Adrian  IV.  ever  devised 
such  a  spurious  document  as  that  which 
contains  such  a  transparent  falsehood. 


THK    ALEXANDER     FORGERY. 

Having  thoroughly  dissected  and  analyzed 
the  spurious  Adrian  Bull,  let  us  now  turn 
to  the  contemplation  of  the  Alexander 
forgery,  which  commences  thus  : 

"  ALEXANDER,  bishop,  servant  of  the  servant* 
of  God,  to  his  most  dear  Son  in 
Christ,  the  illustrious  King  of 
England,  health  and  apostolic 
benediction." 

Like  its  predecessor  in  perfidy,  this  docu- 
ment is  addressed  to  nobody  in  particular, 
so  that  any  King  of  England  might  claim  it 
as  addressed  to  him.  Then  this  royal 
concoction  continues : 

"  Forasmuch  as  these  things,  which  have  been 
on  good  reasons  granted  by  our  predecessors,  de- 
serve to  be  confirmed  in  the  fullest  manner,  and 
considering  the  grant  of  the  dominion  of  the 
realm  of  Ireland  by  the  venerable  Pope  Adrian, 
we,  pursuing  his  footsteps,  do  ratify  and  confirm 
the  same  (reserving  to  St.  Peter,  and  to  the 
Holy  Roman  Church  as  well  in  England  as  in 
Ireland,  the  yearly  pension  of  one  penny  from 
every  house),  provided  that  the  abominations  of 
the  land  being  removed,  that  barbarous  people, 
Christians  only  in  name,  may,  by  your  means, 
be  reformed,  at.d  their  lives  and  conversation 
mended,  so  that  their  disordered  church  being 
thus  reduced  to  regular  discipline,  that  nation 
may,  with  the  name  of  Christians,  be  so  in  act 
and  deed." 

[No  date,  no  seal,  no  witneis,  no  signa- 
ture]. 

In  the  whole  range  of  anti  -Catholic  and 
an ti  Irish  literature,  we  know  of  no  docu- 
ment more  diabolical  in  its  hatred  than  the 
foregoing.  It  bears  the  birth-marks  of  its 
British  parentage  upon  its  face  Its  prom- 
inent prejudice  against  the  faithful  Catholic 
people  of  Ireland,  proves  at  once  that  it 
must  have  emanated  from  some  English 
hireling  who  hated  that  race. 

Abbe  MacGeoghegan  was  most  assuredly 
right  in  his  conjecture  when  he  said  that  a 
comparison  between  these  spurious  bulls 
attributed  to  Popes  Adrian  and  Alexander, 
with  the  treatise  on  "  Ireland  Conquered," 


issued  about  the  same  time  by  Giraldus 
CambrensU,  would  indicate  a  great  similarity 
of  style  between  them  ;  and  if  they  were  not 
written  by  the  same  writer,  it  is  very  evi- 
dent that  they  were  concocted  for  the  pur- 
pose of  maintaining  each  other  mutually, 
and  thereby  the  more  readily  deceive  an 
unsuspecting  public. 

HIT)  POPE  ALEXANDER  GRANT  THIS  BL'LL? 

Let  us  see  ;  and  in  order  to  answer  this 
question  let  us  take  a  brief  retrospective 
glance  at  the  relations  which  existed  be- 
tween Pope  Alexander  III.  and  King  Hen- 
ry, whom  that  Pontiff  must  have  looked 
upon  as  more  than  half  a  heretic. 

In  1164,  only  eight  years  priur  to  the 
date  when  the  bogus  Bull  is  supposed  to 
have  been  issued,  Roger  Hoveden  says  that 
King  Henry  (whom  Alexander  is  made  to 
call  "  his  dear  son  in  Christ")  issued  a  mos* 
harsh  and  heretical  edict  against  the  very 
Pontiff  from  whom  Henry  afterwards  de- 
clared he  procured  the  Bull ! 

In  1166,  only  six  years  prior  to  the  date  giv- 
en to  the  spurious  document,  King  Henry  not 
only  proclaimed  his  allegiance  to  the  anti- 
pope  Guido,  but  he  also  had  laws  enacted* 
by  which  it  was  strictly  forbidden,  under 
heavy  penalties,  to  obey  the  Pontiff  known 
as  Pope  Alexander  III ,  or  to  give  obedi- 
ence to  his  commands  !  Such  were  the 
immediate  antecedents  of  that  King  who 
received  from  the  Pope  he  cursed  and  con- 
demned, a  Rescript  authorizing  him  to  go 
over  to  Ireland  and  to  "  reform  the  barbar- 
ous people,  in  a  land  of  abominations,  whose 
inhabitants  were  Christian  only  in  name"  (!) 
Men  who  believe  in  the  genuineness  of  such 
a  bull,  given  for  such  a  purpose,  and  to  *>/<•/! 
a  man,  must  be  either  fools  that  know  no 
better  or  else  fanatics  that  hate  the  truth 
and  desire  to  persevere  in  their  error. 


MacGeoghegan  quotes  Baronius  as  alleg- 
ing that  King  Henry  '  •  raised  the  waters  to 
overwhelm  not  only  the  Bishop  of  Canter- 
bury, together  with  the  English-Catholic 
Church,but  the  entire  flock  of  the  whole  Cath  • 
olic  Church,  together  with  its  Chief  Pastor 
Alexander  III  ,  against  whom  in  particular, 
he  directed  his  machinations."  Is  it  likely, 

*  MacGeoKhegun,  Hut.  lie.aud,  p.  250. 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


93 


therefore,  that  Pope  Alexander  would  place 
such  a  man  over  the  holy  Hierarchy  of  the 
Church  in  Ireland,  or  authorize  such  an 
Anglican  anarchist  to  bring  "  a  disordered 
church"  into  disc'pline]  No  sane  person 
can  believe  in  such  improbabilities  ever  hav- 
ing come  to  pass. 

In  1168,  only  four  years  anterior  to  the 
date  of  the  fictitious  Bull,  Westmonasteri- 
ensis  says  "  King  Henry,  whose  anger  was 
ch  .nged  into  hatred  of  Blessed  Thomas  and 
of  the  Pope,  in  consequence  of  his  having 
espoused  the  cause  of  the  former,  sent  to 
the  Emperor  Frederick,  requesting  him  to 
en- operate  in  removing  Pope  Alexander 
from  the  Papal  Chair.''  Of  course  Pope 
Alexander  1 1  [.  was  well  aware  of  these 
different  acts  of  schismatical  insubordination 
on  the  part  of  Henry,  and  in  order  to  prop- 
erly chastise  him  therefor,  he  gave  him  an 
Apostolic  commission  to  go  over  to  Ireland 
in  order  to  clean  "  the  impurities"  from  the 
Irish  Church  ! 

In  1169,  just  three  years  before  Pope 
Alexander  dubbed  King  Henry  his  "  most 
dear  son  in  Christ, "  that  same  monarch  dis- 
missed with  contempt  from  his  court,  the 
two  Cardinals  whom  Pope  Alexander  had 
sent  over  to  hold  a  conference  with  him  in 
regard  to  his  anti  Catholic  conduct  toward 
his  Holiness  and  the  representative  ecclesi- 
astics of  the  Catholic  Church  in  England  ! 
Assuredly  Pope  Alexander  would  have 
proved  himself  a  very  weak  and  foolish 
Pontiff  if  ever  he  granted  to  King  Henry 
any  diploma  authorizing  him  to  regulate 
even  so  small  a  space  as  a  rood  of  Chris- 
tendom, much  less  to  "reform"  the  Catholic 
Church  in  Ireland— the  most  consistent  and 
const  mt  in  fidelity  to  Rome  ! 

WAS    IRELAND    EVER    "CHRISTIAN    ONLY    IN 
NAME  ?" 

It  seems  to  us  to  be  an  act  bordering  on 
an  insult  to  the  intelligence  of  the  age  to 
answer  such  a  supremely  ridiculous,  as  well 
as  palpably  false,  question.  Yet,  inasmuch 
as  there  are  persons  who  pose  as  Irish 
"patriots"  because  they  have  transformed 
themselves  into  anti- Catholic  perverts,  and 
who  desire  to  impress  this  conviction  upon 
the  public  mind,  it  is  necessary  for  us — in 


upholding  the  honor  of  God's  Church  and 
the  Catholicity  of  Ireland — to  briefly  glance 
at  the  fame  Ireland  had  already  achieved 
when  that  fraudulent  document  known  as 
"  the  Alexander  Bull''  was  first  forged  by 
order  of  King  Henry  II.  of  England. 

It  is  not  through  any  spirit  of  egotism 
we  proclaim — without  fear  of  contradiction — 
that,  from  the  time  of  their  conversion  down 
to  the  present  day,  no  people  were  ever 
more  purely  or  faithfully  Catholic  than  the 
Irish.  Long  before  the  Cross  was  acknowl  - 
edged  as  the  sign  of  man's  redemption  in 
many  parts  of  Europe,  Ireland  was  popula- 
ting Heaven  with  saints,  and  thus  she  shone 
as  the  Sun  of  God's  glory,  whose  rays  pene- 
trated far  and  wide,  and  whose  Apostles 
carried  the  knowledge  of  God  to  nations 
then  living  in  the  darkness  and  shadow  of 
death. 

Ireland  was  the  hive  of  holiness  from  the 
day  when  St.  Patrick  first  pressed  her  sham- 
rock-strewn sod  with  his  anointed  feet. 
From  out  her  Monasteries,  Abbeys,  Clois- 
ters and  Schools  went  forth  hundreds  of 
holy  men  in  order  to  plant  the  Cross  in 
every  land  on  the  European  Continent. 
The  names  of  saints  like  Aiden,  Colman, 
Arbogart,  Maildulphus,  Cuthbert,  Killian, 
Virgilius,  Fuiden,  Columbanus,  Brendan, 
Boniface,  Ado,  Gerard,  Cormac,  Celsus, 
Silave,  Malachy,  Laurence,  Comgall, 
Cronan  and  hundreds  of  other  canonized 
soldiers  of  the  Church  Triumphant  in 
Heaven,  all  bear  testimony  that  Ireland 
herself  was  always  Christian  to  her  heart's 
core,  and  that  what  she  was  in  the  early 
centuries,  she  is  in  the  nineteenth — the  gar- 
den spot  wherefrom  is  reaped  a  constant  har- 
vest of  Christian  missionaries  to  plant  the 
Cross  in  every  section  of  the  known  world  ! 

Could  it  be  possible  for  Pope  Alexander 
to  call  the  people  of  Ireland  "  Christians 
only  in  name,"  when  he  had  only  to  consult 
the  hagiology  of  the  Church  in  order  to 
learn  that  in  a  little  over  two  centuries — 
(from  432  to  664) — Ireland  had  no  less  than 
350  Saints  who  were  Bishops,  300  Saints 
who  were  Priests,  and  fully  200  Saints  who 
were  Anchorites,  Hermits,  or  men  whose 
lives  justified  the  Church  in  crowning  their 
brows  with  the  aureola  of  superior  sanctity  ? 


94 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


In  vain,  then,  would  Pope  Alexander  look 
over  the  whole  Christian  world  for  a  par- 
allel among  any  people  on  a  par  with  the 
holy  Catholic  Irish  nation  ! 

Now  let  us  introduce  some  testimony  from 
disinterested  witnesses  that  we  may  show  the 
thoroughly  Christian  condition  of  Ireland 
throughout  the  ages  which  followed  her 
first  joyful  acceptance  of  the  true  Faith 
from  the  holy  hands  of  St.  Patrick. 

SAINT  BERNARD'S  TESTIMONY. 

The  holy  Abbot  of  Clairvaux,  in  his  Life 
of  the  Irish  St.  Malachy,  speaks  thus  of 
what  was  accomplished  by  a  single  Irish 
saint  in  the  sixth  century  : 

A  most  noble  monastery  had  been  founded  in 
Bangor*  by  St.  Comgall,  which  brought  forth 
many  thousand  monks,  and  was  the  head  of 
many  monasteries.  It  was  a  place  truly  holy, 
pregnant  with  saints,  and  bringing  forth  most 
copious  fruit  to  God  :  so  much  so,  that  one  of 
the  members  of  that  holy  congregation,  Molua 
by  name,  is  said  to  have  been  the  founder  of  one 
hundred  monasteries.  Its  branches  overcpread 
both  Ireland  and  Scotland.  Nor  were  these  the 
only  countries  blessed  by  its  religious :  as  bees 
from  the  parent  hive,  they  flocked  to  foreign 
shores,  and  one  of  them,  named  Columbanus, 
proceeding  to  Luxieu,  founded  there  a  monas- 
tery which  soon  grew  into  a  great  people. 

It  would  be  strange,  indeed,  if  the  na- 
tives of  a  land  which  was  so  fruitful  in 
sanctity  during  the  sixth  and  seventh  cen- 
turies, should  be  called  "  Christians  only  in 
name"  by  a  Vicar  of  Christ. 

The  Irish  of  the  seventh  century  were  so 
far  from  bein $  "Christians  only  in  name,'' 
that  Mirianus  Scotus,  under  date  of  the 
year  674,  makes  this  entry  in  his  Chronicles: 
"Ireland  was  Ailed  with  saints  or  hoJy  men." 

From  the  eighth  to  the  tenth  century  Ire- 
land was  the  literary  lamp  of  Europe  and 
her  sons  the  Cross  bearers  and  Teachers 
throughout  that  continent.  Two  Irish  mis- 
sionaries went  to  France  in  791,  and  so 
superior  was  their  learning  to  those  among 
whom  they  sojourned,  and  so  attached  to 
them  did  the  French  people  become,  that 
these  saintly  Irish  scholars  founded  the 
first  Universities  in  the  world— Paris  and 
Pavia. 

The  Venerable  Bede,   an  Anglo-Saxon, 

'County  Down,  Ireland. 


tells  us  in  his  4  •  Ecclesiastical  History"  that 
numbers  were  daily  coming  into  Britain 
from  the  country  of  the  Scots  (Irish)  preach- 
ing the  Word  of  God  with  great  devotion." 
Eric  of  Auxerre,  a  French  writer  of  the 
ninth  century,  in  his  letter  to  Charles  the 
Bald,  is  so  astounded  at  the  immense  num- 
ber of  saints  and  scholars  Ireland  sent  at 
that  period  to  the  continent  of  Europe  that 
he  asks  : 

What  shall  I  say  of  Ireland,  which,  despising 
the  dangers  of  the  deep,  is  migrating,  with  al- 
most her  whole  train  of  philosophers  to  our 
coast. 

Lord  Littleton,  in  his  Life  of  Henry  the 
Fecund,  pays  this  high  compliment  to  the 
Irish  people  whom  the  bogus  Alexander 
Bull  declares  to  have  been  "  Christians  only 
in  name" : 

A  school  was  founded  in  Armagh,  which  soon 
became  very  famous.  Many  Irish  went  from 
thence  to  convert  and  teach  other  nations.  Many 
Saxons  out  of  England  resorted  thither  for  in- 
stiudtion,  and  brought  from  thence  the  use  of 
letteis  to  their  ignorant  countrymen. 


Thierry,  in  his  History  of  the  Norman 
Conquest,  thus  speaks  of  Ireland  during  that 
period  : 

In  many  things,  especially  in  religion  the  Irish 
were  enthusiasts.  *  *  *  Their  island  possessed 
a  multitude  of  saints  and  learned  men,  venerated 
alike  in  England  and  in  Gaul ;  for  no  country 
has  furnished  a  greater  number  of  Christian  mis- 
sionaries. 

A  people  who  were  "  enthusiasts  in  reli- 
gion,'1 among  whom  there  were  such  "a  mul- 
titude of  saints,"  and  who  had  "furnished 
a  greater  number  of  Christian  missionaries 
than  all  other  nations  in  the  world,"  might 
be  called  "Christian  only  in  name,"  by 
some  bigoted  British  booby  hireling  of  King 
Henry  II. ,  in  consequence  of  his  ignorance 
and  prejudice,  but  to  insinuate  that  either 
Alexander  III.,  or  any  other  Pope  of  Rome 
ever  gave  currency  to  such  a  most  unwar- 
ranted calumny  upon  the  Catholic  character 
of  the  Irish  people,  is  one  of  the  foulest  and 
grossest  slanders  that  ever  soiled  the  litera- 
ture of  any  age  from  the  days  of  the  falsi- 
fying Cambrensis  down  to  his  manikin  imi- 
tator in  malignancy— Judge  James  G.  Ma- 
guire  of  the  Superior  Court  of  San  Francisco. 


THE       POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


95 


TESTIMONY    OF   ST.     COLUMBANUS. 

The  name  of  the  great  St.  C-lumbanus 
stands  high  in  Irish  hagiology.  He  was  the 
illustrious  founder  of  Bobbio  and  many  oth- 
er monasteries.  In  his  fourth  Letter  to 
Pope  Boniface,  this  great  Irish  servant  of 
God  thus  firmly  and  faithf uliy  places  on  re- 
cord the  f  roud  position  Ireland  then  held 
as  the  truest  and  most  loyal  child  of  the 
Church  of  God  : 

To  the  most  lovely  of  all  Europe,  to  the  Hiad 
of  all  the  Churches,  to  the  Beloved  Father, 
to  the  Ex  il ted  Prelate,  to  the  Pastor  of 
Pastors,  etc. 

After  thus  acknowledging  the  reigning 
Pontiff  as  "  the  Head  of  all  Churches,"  and 
thus  proving  that  Ireland  was  subject  to 
Rome  in  all  things  spiritual,  St.  Columbanus, 
in  the  body  of  this  Letter,  continues  : 

For  we  Irish,  are  disciples  of  St.  Peter  and  St. 
Paul,  and  of  the  divinely-inspired  canonical 
writers,  adhering  constantly  to  the  faith  and 
Apostolic  doctrine.  Among  us  neither  Jew, 
heretic  or  schismatic  can  be  found,  but  the 
Catholic  faith,  entire  and  unshaken,  precisely  as 
we  have  received  it  from  you,  who  are  the  suc- 
cessors of  the  holy  Apostles.  For,  as  I  have  al- 
ready said,  we  are  attached  to  the  Chair  of 
Peter,  and  although  Rome  is  great  and  re- 
nowned, yet  with  us  it  is  great  and  distinguished 
only  on  account  of  that  Apostolic  Chair. 
Through  the  two  Apostles  of  Christ  ye  are  more 
celestial,  and  Borne  is  the  head  of  all  the 
Churches  in  the  world. 

What  a  sublime  eulogy  in  favor  of  the 
fidelity  of  a  great  Catholic  nation  which 
only  revered  Rome  because  it  contained  the 
Chair  of  St.  Peter  !  Could  it  be  possible 
that  such  a  people  would  ever  become 
"  Christians  only  in  name"! 


Cardinal,  John  Henry  Newman,  passes  upon 
the  Catholicity  of  the  Irish  people  : 

"  I  look  towards  a  land  both  old  and  young — 
o'd  in  its  Chrittianity,  young  in  its  promise  of 
the  future  ;  a  nation  which  received  grace  long 
before  the  Saxon  came  to  Britain,  and  which  hat 
never  questioned  it ;  a  Church  which  compre- 
hends in  its  history  the  rise  and  fall  of  Canter* 
bury  and  York,  which  Augustine  and  Paulinus 
found,  and  Pole  and  Fisher  left  behind  them. 

Cardinal  Newman  evidently  never  har- 
bored the  thought  that  there  ever  was 
an  epoch  in  the  history  of  Ireland,  when 
the  false  and  foul  charge  of  being  "  Chris- 
tian only  in  name,"  could  be  successfully 
brought  against  that  nation  of  Virgins,  An- 
chorites, Confessors,  Martyrs  and  Apostles 
of  the  Church  of  God  ! 


TESTIMONY   OF  CARDINAL   NEWMAN. 

We  could  cite  a  score  of  additional  wit- 
nesses, were  it  necessary,  in  order  to  prove 
the  thorough  Catholic  character  of  the  Irish 
people  throughout  every  century,  but  we 
feel  assured  that  it  is  not  necessary.  So  we 
will  now  conclude  this  portion  of  the  defence 
of  the  Popes  and  the  Irish  people  by  pro- 
ducing the  testimony  of  Cardinal  Newman 
and  a  few  other  modern  writers,  in  order 
to  show  the  fidelity  of  the  Irish  people  to 
the  Church  of  Rome  throughout  all  ages. 
Here  is  the  eulogy  which  the  great  English 


TESTIMONY   OF  ARCHDEACON   LYNCH. 

Dr.  Lynch,  the  learned  Archdeacon  of 
Killala,  whose  historical  work  wherein  he 
refutes  the  ribald  calumnies  of  Cambrensis, 
we  have  already  alluded  to,  thus  depicts  the 
close  and  constant  intimacy  which  existed 
throughout  all  ages  between  Rome  and  Ire- 
land : 

If  I  allowed  myself  to  detail  at  length  the  in- 
tercourse of  the  Irish  with  Home  in  former  ages, 
my  page  would  swell  to  unreasonable  limits,  and 
exhaust  my  power  of  language,   though  not  the 
subject  itself.     To  sum  up  then  in  a  few  words  : 
No  dissension  on  religious  matters  ever  arose  in 
Ireland  which     was    not     referred   to    Rome. 
From  Rome   Ireland   had  her  precepts  of  mor- 
ality, and  her  oracles  of  faith.      Rome  was  the 
mother ;  Ireland  the  daughter  ;  Rome  the  head, 
Ireland  the  member.     From  Rome,  the  fountain- 
source  of  Religion,  Ireland  undoubtedly  derived, 
and  with  her  whole  soul  imbibed,  her    faith. 
In  dcubtful  matters  the  Pope  was  the  arbiter  of 
the  Irish  ;  in  things  certain  their  master ;  in  ec- 
/     clesiastical  matters  their    head ;    in  temporals, 
their  defender;    in    all  things  their  judge,   in 
everything  their  adviser  ;  their  oracle  in  doubt, 
their  bulwark  in  the  hour  of  danger.     Some  has- 
tened to  Rome  to  indulge  their  fervor  at  the 
tomb  of  the  Apostles ;    others  to  lay  their  hom- 
age at  the  feet  of  the  Pope,  and  others  to  obtain 
the  nee  ssary  sanction  of  his  authority  for  the 
discharge  ot  their  functions.* 


TESTIMONY   OF    HISTORIAN   GORRES. 

The  learned  Gorres,  the  eminent  German 
•c/'ambrensis  Eversus,  vol.  ii.,  p.  635. 


THK       POPK       AND      IRELAND. 


historian,  thus  depicts  the  monasteries  of 
Ireland  and  the  prolific  faith  which  pro- 
ceeded from  them  : 

When  we  look  into  the  ecclesiastical  life  of  the 
Irish  people,  we  are  almost  tempted  to  believe 
that  some  potent  spirit  had  transported  over 
the  sea  the  cells  of  the  valley  of  the  Nile,  with 
all  their  hermits -its  monasteries  with  all  their 
inmates,  and  settled  them  down  in  this  Western 
Island  ;  an  island  which,  in  three  centuries,  gave 
eight  hundred  and  eighty  taiiits  to  the  Church, 
won  over  to  Christianity  the  North  of  Britain 
and  a  large  part  of  Germany,  and  while  it  de- 
voted the  utmost  attention  to  the  sciences,  cul- 
tivated with  especial  care  the  mystical  contem- 
plation in  her  communities,  as  veil  as  in  the 
saints  which  they  produced. 

The  German  Gorres,  evidently  never 
harbored  in  his  mind  the  horrible  idea  that 
Ireland  was  even  for  a  second  of  time 
"  Christian  only  in  name." 


REV.  A.  COOAN  S  TESTIMONY. 

In  his  "  History  of  the  Diocese  of  Meath," 
Rev.  Anthony  Cogan,  Curate  of  Navan, 
thus  beautifully  portrays  the  enduring  fidel- 
ity of  Ireland's  faith  throughout  all  past 
Christian  ages  : 

Insula  Sancta  I  Missionary  Island  I  Ever 
faithful  and  ever  true  I  In  the  long  night  of  thy 
bondage,  when  thy  enemies  were  drunk  with 
the  blood  of  thy  saint*,  when  thy  soil  was  pur- 
pled with  the  blood  of  martyrs,  when  thy  tem- 
ples were  desecrated,  thy  shrines  plundered,  thy 
virgins  banished,  thy  Priests  were  struck  down  on 
the  very  steps  of  thy  altars  ;  when  the  Mysteries 
of  that  saving  Faith  for  which  yon  sacrificed 
all  in  this  world,  were  celebrated  in  tbe  lone 
glen  or  in  the  fastnesses  of  the  mountain,  as  well 
as  in  the  days  of  thy  greatness  and  glory,  when 
admiring  Europe  hailed  thee  as  the  Insula 
Sanctorum  et  Doctorum.  Holy  Island  !  Through 
the  gloom  of  thy  chequered  and  mournful  his- 
tory, true  haft  thou  been  to  thy  sacred  truttf^ 

•(••'Diocese  of  Meath,  Ancient  and  Modern." 
Dublin.  1862. 


We  are  firmly  convinced  that  nothing 
more  need  be  said  on  our  part  in  order  to 
prove  most  conclusively  the  constant,  un- 
swerving Catholic  character  of  Ireland  in 
every  age  of  her  long  Christian  career.  We 
will  close  this  chapter,  therefore,  by  asking 
those  few  people  who  believe  the  Alexander 
Bull  to  be  genuine,  why  it  is  that  neither 
Pope  Alexander  III.,  nor  any  Pontiff  since 
the  year  1172,  ever  stopped  the  missionary 
spirit  of  the  Irish  people  ?  Most  assuredly 
a  people  who  were  "  Christians  only  in 
name,"  were  not  the  proper  material  from 
whence  to  procure  Apostles  to  carry  the 
true  faith  all  over  the  world  !  If  Pope 
Alexander  harbored  such  an  idea,  he  should 
have  forbidden  the  Irish  priests  from  pene- 
trating into  other  lands  to  plant  the  Cross 
therein  !  But  did  Irishman  ever  evince  a 
single  trace  of  being  Christians  only  in 
name  1  Look  at  England,  look  at  Scotland, 
look  at  America,  look  at  Australia,  look  at 
New  Zealand,  look  at  every  portion  of  the 
whole  world  which  has  been  brought  under 
the  sweet  yoke  of  Christ  in  recent  centuries 
by  means  of  Irish  missionaries,  and  wherein 
Irish  Priests  and  Irish  Bishops  predominate 
to  day,  and  what  man — ,be  he  heretic  or  a 
hater  of  Irish  Catholics — who  will  dare  to 
say  that  the  immutable  and  eternal  Faith 
which  they  have  transplanted  from  Ireland, 
bears  the  faintest  shadow  of  "  Christianity 
only  in  name"  ? 

It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  Pope  Alexander 
never  had  act  or  part  in  perpetrating  the 
foul  calumnies  against  the  Irish  Catholic 
people  which  make  up  the  forgery  which 
men  like  Judge  Maguire  delight  in  digging 
up  from  its  reeking  rottenness  in  order  to 
fling  the  foul  mess  with  the  hands  of  apos- 
tates into  the  faces  of  the  ever-faithful  Irish 
people  ! 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


97 


CHAPTER    XVI. 


John  of  Salisbury  Dissected.  —How  King  Henry  II.  Concocted  the  "Adrian"  Bull. — 
Salisbury's  "Metalogicus." — Who  Wrote  the  42nd  Chapter?— Proof  that  it  was 
not  the  Work  of  John  of  Salisbury. 


It  was  impossible  that  any  false  Bull 
attributed  to  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  and  con- 
cerning Ireland,  could  have  been  success- 
fully promulgated  during  the  lifetime  of 
King  Louis  VII.  of  France,  for  the  cogent 
reason  that  the  fraud  would  at  once  have 
been  discovered  in  consequence  of  the 
King  of  France  having  in  his  possession  the 
Letter  which  Pope  Adrian  IV,  sent  to 
him,  in  which  that  Pontiff  flatly  refused  to 
give  his  sanction  to  any  attempt  at  invading 
Ireland,  which  that  Prince  in  conjunction 
with  King  Henry  II.  had  planned,  and 
which  Louis  VII.  had  presented  to  Adrian 
IV.  for  his  approval. 

It  is  for  this  potent  reason,  therefore, 
that  not  a  single  trace  of  the  bogus  Adrian 
bull  is  to  be  found  in  any  document  issued 
in  England  prior  to  the  year  1180,  which  was 
the  year  in  which  King  Louis  VII.  died. 
This  incident  will  appear  all  the  more 
singular  when  we  bring  to  mind  the  fact 
that  a  number  of  occasions  occurred  when 
King  Henry  could  have  made  good  use  of  a 
genuine  Bull — had  he  possessed  one  — during 
the  many  years  which  tra  spired  between 
the  spurious  date  of  the  fictitious  Adrian 
Bull,  and  the  year  when  it  first  appeared  in 
print  by  means  of  the  instrumental!  y  of 
that  champion  historical  falsifier  of  the 
twelfth  century— Giraldus  Cambrensis. 

If  the  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian  was  genuine, 
why  is  it  that  such  a  document  was  secretly 
concealed  for  upwards  of  twenty  years  after 
the  death  of  Pope  Adrian  ?  Nor  was  it  until 
King  Louis  of  France  had  been  for  some* 
time  in  his  tomb,  that  Cambrensis  injected 
into  his  "  Topographia  Hibernica,"  for  the 
first  time,  the  dubious  document  falsely  sup- 
posed to  have  been  issued  by  that  Pontiff. 

The  answer  to  this  question  is  very  sim- 
ple. When  Pope  Adrian  was  dead,  and 
King  Louis  was  entombed  also,  the  two 


main  witnesses  who  had  the  power  and 
knowledge  which  would  enable  them  to 
discover  and  expose  the  fraud,  could  no 
longer  offer  any  opposition;  hence  there 
was  no  risk  to  run  by  first  injecting  the 
forged  document  into  the  "Conquest  of 
Ireland,"  by  Cambrensis,  so  as  to  prepare 
the  minds  of  those  who  perused  the  work  of 
Giraldus,  for  the  belief  that  such  a  Bull 
actually  existed  in  the  archives  of  England. 

Cambrensis  says  that  the  Adrian  Bull  was 
procured  by  John  of  Salisbury,  and  that 
personage  says  so  himself.  We  have  al- 
ready exposed  the  calumnies  and  the  false- 
hoods with  which  Cambrensis  filled  his 
book  entitled  the  "  Conquest  of  Ireland  " 
and  now  let  us  pass  the  testimony  of  John 
of  Salisbury  through  the  crucible  of  truth, 
in  order  to  discover  if  that  priest  was 
partictps  criminis  with  Cambrensis,  or  was 
he  merely  made  the  means  by  which  the 
evil  intentions  of  Henry  I  f.  were  consum- 
mated. 

The  first  question  to  be  answered  is  :  Did 
John  of  Salisbury  make  any  mention  of  the 
Adrian  Bull!  It  is  true  that  there  is  an 
allusion  to  that  document  in  the  last  chapter 
of  his  work  entitled  " Metalogicus,"  forty-one 
chapters  of  which  are  devoted  to  a  defence 
of  Logic,  Metaphysics,  Dialectics,  the  Cate- 
gories of  Aristotle,  and  the  philosophers 
themselves— both  the  peripathetics  and  the 
Platonics— against  the  assaults  of  ignorant 
adversaries.  These  themes  are  consecutive- 
ly continued  with  great  perspicuity  and 
erudition  throughout  every  chapter  written 
by  Salisbury,  and  the  work  closes  with  a 
suitable  peroration  at  the  end  of  the  forty- 
first  chapter,  when  the  different  difficult 
subjects  treated  of  have  been  diffusively 
and  exhaustively  explained  and  elucidated. 
In  fact  it  would  be  almost  impossible  to  add 
another  chapter  congenial  to  the  themes 
discussed — and  say  anything  new. 


98 


THK       POPK       AND      IRELAND. 


But,  presto,  change !  The  forty-second 
chapter  reads  just  as  appropriate  as  would 
the  addition  of  Mark  Twain's  "  Innocents 
Abroad'"  if  added  to  Burke's  work  on  "The 
Sublime  and  the  Beautiful"  ! 

There  is  neither  autonomy,  coincidence, 
consistency  or  connection  with  the  text  of 
the  previous  forty-one  chapters,  and  the 
themes  therein  explained,  nor  has  the  last 
chapter  a  single  broken  link  even  to  bind 
an  idea  or  an  occurrence  in  it  with  the  deep 
and  metaphysical  subjects  which  are  han- 
dled in  such  a  masterly  manner  by  the  au- 
thor in  all  the  previous  sections  of  his 
erudite  production. 


We  now  intend  to  introduce  to  our  read- 
ers the  contents  of  the  forty-second  chapter 
of  the  "  Metalogicus*"  but  before  doing  so 
we  again  desire  to  bring  vividly  before  their 
minds  the  fact  that  the  book  to  which  it 
was  added,  was  devoted  to  the  exposition 
of  the  intricacies  of  Logic,  guiding  tyros  in 
knowledge  through  the  mazes  of  Meta- 
physics, diagnosing  the  difficulties  of  Dia- 
lectics, explaining  the  Questions  of  Aristotle, 
and  separating  the  dross  from  the  pure 
metal  in  Philosophical  treatises.  Now  to 
forty-one  chapters  on  these  abstrusive, 
deep  and  difficult  subjects  even  for  scholars 
themselves,  we  find  the  work  in  which  they 
are  expounded  with  marvellous  skill,  closed 
with  this  specimen  of  literature,  which  is 
not  only  laughable  from  the  very  ridiculous 
attitude  it  occupies,  but  also  darkly  sus- 
picious from  the  falsehoods  with  which  it  is 
embellished  in  order  to  strengthen  the 
forged  Bull  which  is  attributed  to  Pope 
Adrian  the  Fourth. 

Following  is  the  text  of  the  dubious 
chapter  which  we  present  to  our  readers  as 
it  has  been  tranala  ed  from  the  French  of 
the  editor  of  the  Atwlecta  Juris  Pont  fail, 
of  Paris,  who  translated  the  document 
from  the  original  Latin.  Here  is  what 
John  of  Salisbury  is  made  to  say  in  the  last 
chapter  of  his  work  on  Logic  : 

"I  have  just  finished  (the  " Afttalogicus"). 
The  present  time  is  to  be  devoted  to  weeping 
rather  than  writing.  I  am  taught  by  sensible 
experience  that  the  whole  world  is  sutject  to 
vanity.  We  looked  for  peace,  but  alaa  !  the 
storm  has  burst  upon  the  inhabitants  of  Ton- 
louse,  and  it  has  stirred  up  all  around  the 


French  and  the  English  kings  that  formerly 
lived  in  harmony,  aa  we  can  bear  testimony, 
now  relentlessly  with  each  other.  Farther- 
more,  the  death  of  our  Lord  Pope  Adrian,  has 
brought  grief  to  all  Christendom,  but  especially 
to  England,  the  land  of  his  birth.  All  good 
people  deplore  his  loss,  but  no  one  should  weep 
for  him  more  than  I.  Indeed,  though  he  had  a 
mother,  and  a  brother,  he  loved  me  more  than 
he  loved  them.  He  declared,  both  publicly  and 
privately,  that  he  loved  me  better  than  he  did 
any  one  else  in  the  whole  world.  He  had  such 
an  opinion  of  me  that  he  felt  pleasure  in  opening 
his  heart  and  his  conscience  to  me  whenever  an 
opportunity  presented  itself.  Though  Roman 
Pontiff,  he  was  pleased  to  have  me  as  his  guest 
at  bis  table,  and,  notwithstanding  my  opposi- 
tion, he  would  have  it  that  we  should  use  to- 
gether  the  same  plate  and  glats  At  my  request 
he  conceded  and  gave  to  the  illustrious  king  of 
England,  Henry  II.,  Ireland,  to  be  possessed  by 
him,  by  hereditary  right,  as  A.drianV  Letters, 
which  are  preserved  to  this  day,  plainly  show. 
For  all  the  islands,  by  virtue  of  an  ancient  right, 
are  regarded  as  belonging  to  the  Roman  Church. 
Besides,  Pope  Adrian  sent  through  me  a  gold 
ring  adorned  with  a  ruby  of  great  value,  for  the 
king's  right  of  in  vesture  in  Ireland,  and  that  ring 
ie,  according  to  order,  preserved  in  the  public 
archives  of  the  Court. 

I  would  never  get  through  if  I  attempted  to 
mention  all  the  virtues  of  the  illustrious  Pontiff. 
But  what  deeply  afflicts  all  hearts,  is  the  schism 
which,  in  punishment  of  our  sins,  desolates,  just 
after  the  death  of  the  Pope,  the  Church.  Be- 
sides the  public  grief  which  affects  all,  I  enduie 
a  personal  affliction  which  is  not  less  oppressive. 
Indeed,  my  Father  and  Lord,  who  is  also  your?, 
the  venerable  Theobald,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, is  seriously  sick,  and  we  cannot  yet  tell 
what  will  be  the  result  of  this  kfiimity.  Being 
no  longer  able  to  attend  to  business,  as  was  his 
wont,  he  has  imposed  on  me  a  very  severe  duty, 
a  very  heavy  burden,  by  confiding  to  me  the 
care  of  all  the  ecclesiastics.  My  mind  meets 
everywhere  but  afflictions  and  sufferings,  and  I 
feel  that  I  am  incapable  of  expressing  the  tor- 
ments that  I  endure.  There  remains  to  me  no 
other  support  than  to  pray  to  the  God  Man,  the 
Son  of  the  stainless  Virgin." 

.  This  strange  document— eays  the  editor  of 
the  Annlecta — calls  for  some  very  serious 
observations,  which  we  shall  divide  into 
sections,  so  as  to  throw  all  the  light  possible 
on  the  subject. 

"  The  passage  in  the  document  which  re- 
fers to  the  Siege  of  Toulouse,  is  copied  from 
the  preface  of  the  "  Polycraticus."  If  John 


THB      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


99 


of  Salisbury  entered,  about  that  period,  into 
the  service  of  A'Becket,  could  he  be,  at  the 
same  time,  the  Chancellor  and  Secretary  of 
Archbishop  Theobald? 

—  n. — 

In  the  preface  to  the  "  Metalcgicus"  Salis- 
bury speaks  of  functions  which  he  per- 
formed by  order  of  his  Lord,  in  regard  to 
the  ecclesiastical  causes  of  all  England  ;  but 
he  does  not  name  the  Archbishop ;  he  does 
not  say  that  he  is  speaking  of  Theotald. 
Here  is  the  passage  of  the  preface  referred 
to: 

"  Scarcely  any  more  time  was  taken  from  my 
necessary  occupations  than  what  was  needed  for 
my  meals  and  sleep,  for,  at  the  command  of  my 
Lord,  which  I  was  faithful  in  obeying,  the  care 
of  all  England,  with  regard  to  ecclesiastical 
causes,  devolved  on  me." 

Now  all  this  harmonizes  well  enough  with 
the  early  period  of  A'Becket ;  with  the  pe" 
riod  anterior  to  the  conflict  with  Henry  II. 
It  follows  then  that  the  "  Metalogicus" 
must  have  been  composed  about  this  period. 

We  cannot  see  what  motive  prompted  the 
author  to  repeat  in  the  42nd  chapter  what 
he  had  already  said  in  the  preface,  to  wit : 
That  he  was  completely  absorbed  by  busi- 
ness ;  by  the  labors  that  his  oflice  super- 
induced. What  is  clear  in  the  preface 
becomes  amphibological  in  the  42nd  chap- 
ter. The  preface  thus  reads:  "The  care 
of  all  England  with  regard  to  ecclesiastical 
causes."  This  reading  denotes  the  exerdse 
of  Metropolitan  or  Primatial  jurisdiction, 
In  the  42nd  chapter,  on  the  contrary,  there 
is  no.  longer  question  of  the  affairs  of  all 
England  ;  he  speaks  only  of  ecclesiastics, 
which  reading  certainly  points  out  only 
persons  of  a  special  class— omnium  ecchsi- 
asticorum  sollicitvdo.  It  might  be  that 
Salisbury  was  a  simple  superintendent  of 
the  moral  conduct  of  the  clergy  ! 

What  is  truly  new  in  the  suspected  chap- 
ter, is  the  name  of  Theobald,  which  is  not 
in  the  preface.  As  it  is  extremely  doubtful 
whether  Salisbury  was  ever  in  the  service 
of  Theobald,  this  circumstance  greatly 
aggravates  the  suspicion  against  the  42nd 
chapter  of  the  "  Metalogicus  " 

What  the  writer  relates  about  the  famili- 
arity with  which  Pope  Adrian  treated  him, 
is,  beyond  all  question,  unworthy  of  the 


Papal  majesty.  Salisbury  expressed  him- 
self far  more  modestly  in  the  "  Polycrati- 
cus": 

"  I  remember  that  I  set  out  for  Apulia  with 
the  intention  of  visiting  our  Lord  Pope  Adrian 
IV.,  who  admitted  me  to  close  familiarity  with 
him.  I  remained  neer  him  at  Beneventum  for 
about  three  months.  As  we  often  spoke  on  diff- 
erent topics,  as  is  the  custom  among  friends,  and 
as  he  questioned  me  familiarly  and  carefully 
about  what  men  thought  of  him  and  the  Roman 
Church,  I  took  the  liberty  of  declaring  plainly 
to  him  what  I  had  learned  in  the  different  prov 
inces."  (Pofycraticus,  lib.  G.  chap.  24). 

What  mortal  will  believe  that  Pope  Adri- 
an ever  said,  publicly  or  privately,  that  he 
"  loved  Salisbury  better  than  he  loved  any 
other  person  in  the  world,  better  even  than 
he  loved  his  own  mother  and  his  brother  V 
If  there  ever  was  "bosh,"  there  it  is. 

Now  we  know  that  the  Pope  eats  alone. 
The  Roman  Ceremonials  of  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury point  out  the  days  on  which  the  Cardi- 
nals were  invited  to  the  Papal  table.  It 
would  be  already  a  sufficiently  strange  story 
that  Salisbury  was  an  habitual  guest  of  the 
Pope  for  nearly  three  months,  but  that  the 
Pope  himself  should  have  arranged  matters 
in  such  a  way  that  he  and  Salisbury  should 
eat  from  the  same  plate  and  drink  from  the 
same  glass,  is  an  enormity  which  ought  to 
have  been,  from  the  beginning,  sufficient  to 
reject  the  document  under  consideration  as 
truly  apocryphal.  There  was  only  one  thing 
more  needed  to  be  said  by  Salisbury  to  ren- 
der this  document  supremely  ridiculous,  to 
wit  :  that  he  and  the  Pope  slept  in  the 
same  bed!  It  seems  incomprehensible  how 
the  forger  did  not  see  that  his  ridiculous 
exaggeration  would  take  away,  beforehand, 
all  faith  in  what  he  was  going  to  say  about 
Ireland. 

—  iv. — 

If  it  is  true  that  Pope  Adrian  gave  Ire- 
land to  the  King  of  England,  at  the  request 
of  Salisbury  (ad  preces  meas),  that  naturally 
signifies  that  Kin^  Henry  II.  did  not  solicit 
this  donation,  which  was  spontaneous  on 
the  part  of  the  Pope.  But  this  circum- 
stance is  contradicted  by  the  apocryphal 
Bull,  which  mentions  the  Letter  of  the 
King.  In  any  case,  it  is  a  very  strange 
thing  that  the  donation  of  a  kingdom  should 


100 


THE       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


have  been  obtained  by  an  individual  who 
had  no  official  character.  The  pseudo-Salis- 
bury of  the  42nd.  chapter  does  not  even  hint 
that  Henry  II.,  had  charged  him  with  the 
mission  of  soliciting,  in  his  name,  the  au- 
thority to  invade  the  land  of  Ireland,  and  to 
force  its  inhabitants  to  acknowledge  him  as 
their  lord  and  master.  On  the  other  hand 
the  apocryphal  Bull  does  not  name  Salis- 
bury, nor  does  it  designate  any  ambassador 
who  solicited  the  gift  in  the  name  of  the 
King.  One  would  be  inclined  to  think  that 
the  whole  affair  was  managed  and  concluded 
by  epistolary  correspondence  ! 

— V 

Salisbury  designates  in  the  Polycraticus 
the  period  of  his  interview  with  Adrian  IV. 
by  saying  that  he  saw  him  at  Benevento. 
Adrian  IV.  sojourned  at  Beneventum  more 
than  seven  months,  viz  :  from  the  21st  of 
November,  1155,  to  the  10th  of  July,  1156. 
If  the  concession  of  Ireland  was  made 
during  the  three  months  that  Salisbury  re- 
mained at  Beneventum,  how  explain  the 
silence  he  observed  in  regard  to  the  Bull  in 
his  Polycroiwus,  which  was  published  three 
years  afterwards,  viz  :  in  1159  ? 

And,  on  the  other  hand,  if  the  donation  of 
Ireland  occurred  during  another  visit  made 
by  Salisbury,  the  author  of  the  42nd.  chapter 
should  have  for  so  much  the  more  reason 
designated  the  epoch  of  the  Bull's  issuance, 
as  the  apocryphal  Bull  is  without  date  in 
the  works  of  Giraldus  Cambrensis,  who  was 
the  first  to  publish  it. 

Other  historians  or  compilers  have  added 
Datum  Romce,  etc.  According  to  that  the 
Bull  could  not  have  been  issued  during  the 
sojourn  of  Adrian  at  Beneveutum.  Nor 
can  it  be  connected  with  the  visit  of  John 
of  Salisbury,  described  in  the  Polycratlcus. 
— vi — 

The  author  of  the  42nd.  chapter  of  Meta- 
loyiciu  tells  of  a  Letter  of  Adrian  IV.,  in 
relation  to  Ireland  ;  but  he  certainly  did 
not  know  the  tenor  of  it,  and  he  never  saw 
it.  Had  he  known  its  tenor  or  seen  it,  he 
would  not  have  stated  that  the  Pope  gave 
Ireland  to  the  King  of  England  and  to  his 
successors  to  be  possessed  by  them  by  heredi- 
tary right.  "Ad  prece*  meas  illustri 
Anglorum  regi  Benrlco  secundo  roncesrit 


et  dedit  Hibernian  Juro  hcereditario  posri- 
demiam,  sicut  litterce  ipsius  testantur  in 
hodiernum  diem." 

What  a  misfortune  that  the  writer  did 
not  give  the  date  of  the  hodieritus  die* ! 
In  the  apocryphal  Bull,  on  the  contrary, 
there  is  no  question  of  investiture,  and  still 
less  of  perpetual  investiture,  which  passes 
to  the  heirs  and  successors  without  the  ob- 
ligation of  having  it  renewed  at  every  change 
of  government.  The  apocryphal  Bull  sim- 
ply announces  a  personal  concession  to 
Henry  II.  given  to  him  for  the  purpose  of 
reforming  morals  and  repressing  vices.  It 
was  only  for  the  accomplishment  of  this 
temporary  mission— exclusively  religious 
and  moral — that  the  Pope  urged  the  people 
of  Ireland  to  receive  with  honor  the  king, 
and  to  revere  him  as  their  lord. 

"We  therefore,"  (it  is  the  apocryphal  Bull 
that  is  speaking)  "  with  approving  and  favor- 
able views  commend  thy  pious  and  laudable  de- 
sire, and,  to  aid  thy  undertaking,  we  give  to  thy 
petition  our  grateful  and  willing  consent,  that 
for  extending  the  boundaries  of  the  Church,  the 
restraining  the  prevalence  of  vice,  the  improve- 
ment of  morals  the  implanting  of  virtue,  the 
propagation  of  the  Christian  religion,  thou  enter 
that  island  and  pursue  those  things  which  shall 
tend  to  the  honor  of  God,  and  the  salvation  of 
His  people,  and  that  they  may  receive  thee  with 
honor,  and  revere  thee  as  their  lord." 

Now  all  this  differs  essentially  from  feu- 
dal investiture  ! 


The  sending  of  a  ring  as  a  sign  of  inves- 
titure, is  unparalleled  in  history,  unless  the 
Pope  designates  at  the.  same  time  a  dele- 
gate charged  with  performing  publicly  the 
ceremony  of  the  giving  of  the  ring.  The 
pseudo- Salisbury  says,  in  all  seriousness, 
that  ''Pope  Adrian  sent  a  gold  ring  adorned 
with  a  ruby  of  great  value,  by  which  the 
right  of  investiture  would  be  made,  and 
that  the  very  same  ring  was  preserved,  ac- 
cording to  orders  given,  in  the  public  Ar- 
chives. "  We  are  looking  all  around  to  see 
who  the  Papal  Delegate  was  who  performed 
the  ceremony  ?  But  we  cannot  make  out 
who  it  was.  It  certainly  was  not  Salisbury, 
who  was  only  a  simple  priest.  It  was  no 
one  !  The  apocryphal  Bull  does  not  say  a 
word  about  a  ring,  nor  investiture.  We 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


101 


nowhere  find  a  vestige  of  the  ring  save  in 
Giraldus  Cumbrensis — and  in  the  pseudo- 
Salisbury  ! 

— vm  — 

There  is  not  a  single  case  of  hereditary 
investiture  to  be  found  in  the  Papal  di- 
plomatics of  the  twelfth  century.  The 
Popes  who  permitted  the  investiture  to  pass 
to  heirs  and  successors,  required  a  renewal 
and  confirmation  of  it  at  every  change  of 
government  and  Pontificate.  The  Normans 
of  Naples  and  Sicily  were  subject  to  the 
common  law.  The  Diplomas  may  be  seen 
all  through  Baronius'  Annals  and  other 
works.  According  to  the  pseudo-Salisbury 
Adrian  IV.  treated  the  Normans  of  Eng- 
land with  more  consideration  than  their 
brethren  elsewhere,  and  arranged  that  their 
investiture  should  continue  perpetually — 
through  the  magical  influences  of  a  ring 
kept  in  the  royal  Archives  of  Winchester  ! 


Salisbury  was  by  far  too  well  instructed 
to  say  thai  the  Emperor  Constantine  founded 
the  Roman  Church.  Its  foundation  dates 
from  JESUS  CHRIST,  and  the  days  of  the 
Apostles.  It  is  not  even  quite  true  that 
the  Emperor  endowed  the  Roman  Church, 
for  even  during  the  persecutions,  the 
Church  possessed  goods  which,  being  con- 
fiscated under  Diocletian,  were  restored  by 
order  of  Constantine. 

If  John  of  Salisbury  wrote  in  1160  that 
all  the  islands  belonged  to  the  Holy  See,  it  is 
clear  that  he  did  not  reflect  that  he  was,  by 
his  very  words,  putting  the  island  of  Eng- 
land under  the  Holy  See  !  We  meet  with  the 
same  inconsistency  in  the  false  Bull.  In  a 
word  the  whole  42nd.  chapter  of  the  Meta- 
logicus  is  a  tissue  of  blunders,  inconsis- 
tencies and  inaccuracies.  Our  remarks  en-, 
tirely  relieve  John  of  Salisbury  of  its 
fathership— it  is  certainly  the  work  of  a 
pseudo-Salisbury  and  very  bunglingly  gotten 
up!" 

SALISBURY'S  CONNECTION  WITH  HENRY  n. 
For  the  better  understanding  of  this  im- 
portant historical  question,  it  may  not  be  out 
of  place  to  give  our  readers  an  idea  of  the 
close  intimacy  which  existed  between  the 


King  who  caused  both  the  Adrian  and 
Alexander  Bulls  to  be  forged,  and  the  ec- 
clesiastic in  whose  work  the  statement  was 
made  that  Pope  Adrian  gave— at  his  simple 
request — Ireland  to  King  Henry  II. 

John  of  Salisbury  spent  a  number  of 
years  on  the  Continent,  until  in  the  year 
1160,  the  publication  of  his  Polycraticus 
gained  for  him  such  public  attention  that 
Thomas  a'Becket,  at  that  time  Chancellor  of 
England,  sent  for  him  and  attached  him  to 
his  service. 

Among  the  voluminous  correspondence 
which  Salisbury  left  behind  him,  there  have 
been  discovered  a  number  of  letters  to  Pope 
A.,  written  by  him  as  Secretary  of  Arch- 
bishop T.,  but  unfortunately  these  initials 
are  just  as  well  adapted  to  Pope  Alexander 
and  A  rchbishop  Thomas,  as-they  are  to  Pope 
Adrian  and  Archbishop  Theobald. 

Here  the  question  naturally  arises  :  Could 
Salisbury  be  in  the  service  of  Archbishop 
Theobald,  and,  at  the  same  time,  act  as 
Secretary  to  St.  Thomas?  In  answer  to 
this  interrogatory  the  only  solution  is  pre- 
sented by  the  last  and  interpolated  chapter 
of  the  Metalogicus,  which  most  undoubtedly 
was  written  by  some  person  whose  interest  it 
was  to  circulate  the  rumor  that  during  the 
last  years  of  the  life  of  Archbishop  Theo- 
bald, viz  :  in  the  year  1160,  or  the  year  fol- 
lowing, Pope  Adrian  donated  Ireland  to 
King  Henry  II.  of  England.  Did  Salisbury 
add  this  chapter,  or  was  it  forged  and  ap- 
pended to  his  work  by  other  hands  ?  Let  us 
probe  deeper  into  this  problem. 

Salisbury's  secretaryship  to  St.  Thomas  is 
admitted,  because  he  volunteers  his  own 
testimony  that  he  was  constantly  on  the 
alert  to  restrain  the  zeal  of  St.  Thomas,  in 
order  to  prevent  any  breach  of  friendship 
between  King  Henry  and  that  Prelate. 
From  his  officious  intervention,  it  would 
seem  that  Salisbury  was  more  favorable  to 
the  King  of  England  than  he  was  to  the 
Primate  of  Canterbury  who  employed  him, 
yet  we  must  do  him  the  justice  to  say  that 
he  shared  the  exile  of  St.  Thomas  when 
Henry's  threats  and  turbulence  drove  that 
holy  Prelate  over  to  France.  And  when  St. 
Thomas  returned  to  England,  Salisbury 
came  over  also  and  resumed  his  position  as 


102 


THK       POPK      AND      IRKLAND. 


the  Archbishop's  secretary,  an  office  he  oc- 
cupied up  to  the  fatal  hour  when  the  saint- 
ly form  of  Thomas  a'Becket  was  struck  down 
by  the  hands  of  his  murderers. 

After  the  death  of  St.  Thomas,  Salisbury 
continued  to  be  attached  to  the  Cathedral  of 
Canterbury  as  a  simple  priest,  up  to  the  year 
1176,  when  he  was  nominated  to  the  See  of 
Chartres  in  France  through  the  influence  of 
Kiity  Henry.  It  is  true,  however,  that 
Salisbury  was  e'ected  to  that  See  by  the 
canonical  mode  then  in  custom,  and  more- 
over it  is  of  record  that  King  Louis  of 
France  sent  him  an  epistle  advising  him  to 
accept  the  See.  These  circumstances  may 
look  plausible  enough  on  the  surface,  but 
nevertheless  we  are  justified  in  suspecting 
conspiracy  and  dissimulation  in  all  such 
mat  ers  where  the  secret  influence  of  King 
Henry  is  apparent. 

Why  did  King  Henry  originate  the  move- 
ment to  make  Salisbury  the  Bishop  of  a 
French  See  ?  Did  the  King  expect  some 
great  favor  in  return,  or  had  he  bargained 
beforehand  for  such  a  requisite  return  for 
his  royal  condescension  ]  In  a  word,  was  the 


See  of  Chartres  the  price  of  Salisbury's 
treason  to  truth,  and  was  that  benefice  the 
quid  pro  quo  for  Salisbury's  kindness  to  the 
King  by  adding  the  forty  second  chapter  to 
his  Metalogicus,  in  ivhich  alone  appears  any 
allusion  to  Adrian,  Henry  or  the  bogus  Bull, 
througfwut  the  whole  work? 

The  priestly  character  of  John  of  Salis- 
bury compels  us  to  reject  the  idea  that  he 
ever  entered  into  any  bargain  whatever  with 
King  Henry  II.,  relative  to  the  bogus  Bui). 
But  from  what  our  readers  already  know  of 
the  cunning  and  unscrupulous  character  of 
King  Henry,  it  requires  no  stretch  of  the 
imagination  to  suppose  that  monarch  capa- 
ble of  carrying  out  any  nefarious  scheme 
that  he  deemed  necessary  for  the  gratifica- 
tion of  his  passion,  his  aggrandisement  or  his 
ambition. 

It  is  supposed  by  several  authorities  that 
John  of  Salisbury  wrote  his  Metalogicus  in 
1176,  previous  to  his  elevation  to  the  See  of 
Chartres,  nor  is  it  unlikely  that  he  left  the 
manuscript  of  his  work  with  King  Henry, 
who  caused  the  forty-second  chapter  to  be 
added  thereto  after  the  author's  death. 


CHAPTER      XVII. 

Further  Criticisms  on  the  Fictitious  Chapter  in  Salisbury's  "Metalogicus." — Professor 
Jungmann's  Judgment. — King  Henry's  Oath  at  Avranches. — An  Insight  into  the 
Characters  of  the  two  Popes  to  whom  the  Spurious  Bulls  are  Attributed.— Finding 
the  Matrix  from  which  Papal  Seals  were  Forged. 


In  the  last  chapter  we  gave  the  very 
exhaustive  and  caustic  criticism  of  the  Adri- 
an Bull,  as  well  as  the  added  chapter  to  the 
"Metalogicus"  of  John  of  Salisbury,  which 
Victor  Palme,  the  learned  editor  of  the 
Anvlecta  Juris  Pontificii,  published  some 
six  years  ago  in  Paris.  But  in  order  that 
our  readers  may  fully  understand  that  the 
subject  is  by  no  means  entirely  exhausted, 
we  now  produce  the  testimony  of  other 
writers  on  the  spurious  character  of  two 
documents  which  are  at  last  beginning  to 
have  the  light  of  historical  truth  turned 
upon  them,  in  order  to  prove  beyond  con- 
troversy that  they  were  purposely  forged  by 
a  licentious  English  King,  in  order  to  give 
him  a  false  claim— under  cover  of  which 


he  hoped  to  invade  Ireland  and  to  rob  that 
people  of  their  liberty  and  their  property. 


CONSIDERATIONS   ON     POPE    ADRIAN  S    CHAR- 
ACTER. 

In  the  apocryphal  chapter  of  the  "  Meta- 
logicus," by  John  of  Salisbury,  which  has 
already  been  published,  occurs  the  follow- 
ing brief  but  rather  singular  account  of  how 
Ireland  was  supposed  to  have  been  taken 
from  its  rightful  owners  and  handed  over 
to  K  ng  Henry  II.  of  England,  without 
that  King  ever  going  to  the  trouble  of 
making  such  a  request !  Here  is  what  the 
"Metalogicus"  is  made  to  say  on  that 
subject : 

"At  my  request  he  (Pope  Adrian  IV.,)  ceded 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


103 


and  gave  to  the  illustrious  King  of  England, 
Henry  II.,  Ireland,  to  be  possessed  by  him,  by 
hereditary  right." 

If  we  are  to  believe  the  above  extract 
from  the  " Metulogicus,"  Pope  Adrian  gave 
Ireland  to  King  Henry  at  the  mere  request 
of  John  of  Salisbury  !  The  folly  of  such 
a  donation  being  given  at  the  request  of  a 
simple  priest  without  courtly  influence  or 
kingly  credentials,  is  too  preposterous  to  be 
worthy  of  any  consideration  ! 

Are  we  to  believe  that  the  same  Pontiff 
who  refused  the  kiss  of  peace  to  the  Em- 
peror Frederick  Barbarossa,  because  the 
German  conqueror  declined  to  hold  the 
Pope's  stirrup  while  his  Holiness  mounted 
his  horse,  gave  away  an  Island  with  a  mil- 
lion of  inhabitants,  3,000  Catholic  ecclesias- 
tics and  hundreds  of  churches,  convents, 
monasteries  and  abbeys— at  the  simple  re- 
quest of  a  viiiting  priest  without  official 
character  or  credential  of  any  kind  ? 

Are  we  to  believe  that  the  Pope  who 
refused  to  surrender  a  single  town  in  Italy 
to  the  German  Emperor,  backed  by  a  hun- 
dred thousand  German  spears,  could  hand 
over  the  independent  Irish  nation  to  an 
English  monarch  at  the  after-dinner  request 
of  John  of  Salisbury  1 

Is  it  not  past  human  credence  to  suppose 
that  the  Pope  who  for  years  defied  Arnold 
of  Brescia,  and  finally  vanquished  him  by 
the  power  of  the  spiritual  sword,  would 
think  so  lightly  of  the  lives,  liberties  and 
happiness  of  the  Irish  Catholic  nation,  as 
to  barter  them  all  away  without  once  ask- 
ing that  people  if  they  desired  such  a 
change  ? 

Could  it  be  possible  that  the  sagacious 
and  courageous  Pontiff  who  boldly  told 
Frederick  of  Barbarossa  that  "the  rights, 
the  posspssions,  and  the  liberties  of  the 
Roman  Church  would  be  maintained  at  any 
cost,"  would  prove  so  inconsistent  to  all  his 
former  actions  as  to  bestow  Ireland  upon 
King  Henry  as  a  personal  favor  to  a  transi- 
tory visitor? 

Pope  Adrian's  life — to  use  his  own  ex- 
act words — had  been  passed  "  between  the 
anvil  and  the  hammer."  He  had  been 
compelled  to  flee  from  Rome  by  the  violent 
assaults  of  the  vicious  enemies  of  the 
Church,  and  more  than  one-half  of  the 


years  of  his  Pontifioate  were  spent  in  exile 
battling  against  the  persecutions  and  an- 
tagonism of  armed  allies  who  desired  to 
crush  the  Papacy  and  to  rob  the  Church  of 
her  temporal  possessions.  Is  it  possible, 
therefore,  that  the  Pope  who  so  persistent- 
ly, and  at  such  personal  sacrifice,  defended 
the  temporal  possessions  cf  the  See  of 
Rome  from  the  hands  of  vandal  Emperors, 
would  surrender  so  quietly,  so  unjustly  and 
so  ridiculously,  the  whole  people  and  the 
land  of  Erin  into  the  keeping  of  a  foreign 
king  who  had  no  more  right  to  Ireland 
than  he  had  to  the  Chair  of  St.  Peter  or 
the  tiara  of  the  Pope  himself  1 

Pope  Adrian  was  not  the  Pontiff  to  act 
in  the  foolish  and  unjust  manner  John  of 
Salisbury  is  supposed  to  depict  him,  and 
few  people  there  are  who  will  believe  that 
such  a  "donation"  was  ever  bestowed  upon 
the  mere  request  of  a  friendly  visitor  whose 
description  of  his  life  in  Beneventum,  places 
the  stamp  of  "doubt"  upon  his  whole  nar- 
rative. 


PROFESSOR  JUNGMANN  S  JUDGMENT. 

Professor  Jungmann,  from  whose  "His- 
torical Lectures"  we  are  about  to  quote, 
has  been  for  several  years  Professor  of 
History  in  the  University  of  Louvain,  and 
as  this  justly  celebrated  Belgian  historian 
is  entirely  devoid  of  any  prejudice  which 
might  be  attributed  to  an  English  or 
an  Irish  writer,  thereby  preventing  them 
from  giving  impartial  testimony  in  the  case, 
we  claim  that  Professor  Jungmann's  evi- 
dence adds  much  additional  weight  to  the 
volume  of  testimony  which  we  have  already 
produced  in  order  to  show  clearly,  explicitly 
and  conclusively,  that  the  spurious  Adrian 
Bull  was  manufactured  in  England. 

Professor  Jungmann  says  there  are  grave 
reasons  for  considering  the  Adrian  Bull  to 
be  spurious,  "as  it  is  well  known  from  his- 
tory that  everywhere  towards  the  close  of 
the  twelfth  century — forged  or  corrupted 
Pap  il  Letters  or  Diplomas  were  not  uncom- 
mon j|  That  such  was  the  case  in  England 

;i  The  Anglo  Norman  adventurers,  who  enter- 
tained the  design  of  invading  Ireland  even  as 
early  as  1155.  fortunately  left  behind  them  the 
evidence  of  their  guilt  in  the  shape  of  a  matrix 
which  was  used  for  forging  the  Papal  seal,  wnbh 
was  found  some  jears  pgo  in  the  ruins  of  one  of 


104 


THE      POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


is  susceptible  of  proof  from   the  Letters  of 
John  Sarisbiensis  and  of  others.* 

"Richard,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  the 
successor  of  Thomas  A'Becket,  commanded 
all  the  Bishops  to  promulgate  in  all  their 
churches  the  severe  punishment  of  excom- 
munication against  the  public  pest  of  forg- 
ery, so  common  had  this  crime  become  in 
the  twelfth  centuryt.  In  the  time  of  Pope 
Innocent  II f.,  also,  various  statutes  were 
enacted  against  this  abominable  crime, 
which  was  becoming  daily  more  widespread 
and  dangerous.  X 

"  In  view  of  these  facts,"  says  Jungmann, 
'•  it  is  not  at  all  to  be  wondered  at  if  some 
forged  document  attributed  to  Pope  Adrian 
IV.,  should  be  produced  and  circulated. 
Moreover,  the  document  attributed  to  Pope 
Adrian,  which  has  no  place,  day  or  year 
whereby  to  locate  it,  must  necessarily  be 
ascribed  to  the  year  1155  or  1156,  that  be- 
ing the  time  when  it  is  said  John  of  Salis- 
bury visited  the  Pope  at  Beneventum. 
But  down  to  the  year  1175.  there  is  not  a 
vestige  of  proof  that  the  so-called  bull  of 
Adrian  was  shown  or  published  by  King 
Henry  of  England,  although  it  was  of  the 
highest  importance  that  it  should  be  made 
known,  since  there  was  question  of  the 
submission  of  Ireland." 

"  It  is  true,"  continues  Professor  Jung- 
mann, "that  Sylvester  Malone,  in  his 
Church  history  of  Ireland,  states  that  the 
Letter  of  Adrian  was  shown  and  its  purport 
made  known  to  the  bishops  and  princes  of 
Ireland  in  1172,  at  a  synod  said  to  have 
been  held  in  Cashel,  and  that,  therefore, 
we  can  readily  understand  the  cause  of  the 
ready  submission  of  Ireland  to  King  Henry 
II.  "But,"  remarks  Jungmann,  "there  is 
no  mention  whatever  of  the  Adrian  docu- 
ment found,  and  the  submission  of  a  por- 
tion of  the  Irish  people  to  the  English  King 
is  explained  sufficiently  well  from  far  differ- 
ent circumstances." 


the  aarliest  Anglo-Norman  monasteries  founded 
by  De  Courcy,  and  which  is  now  preserved  in 
the  Royal  Irish  Academy.  — "  Fronde's  Slanders 
on  Ireland  and  Irishmen,"  by  Col.  James  E. 
McGee.  New  York  :  1872. 

•Cfr.  epp  83,  89,  129.  in  Epht  m  p<t>tab 
Altxa*dro  III. :  "  Nobit  si  plactt,  rescribite  qua 
animadrersione  feriendi  tunt  corruptorts  littr- 
arum  rtttrarum.'' 

t  Ptttr  Bleus,  ep  53 

i  Phillip,  K.  R.  B.  III.  -  §  154  168. 


"Even  Pope  Alexander  III.,  the  im- 
mediate successor  in  the  Papal  Chair  of 
Pope  Adrian  IV. ,  makes  no  mention  in  his 
own  genuine  epistles  of  such  a  concession 
ever  having  been  made  by  his  predecessor 
in  the  Papacy,  nor  does  he  allude  to  the 
donation,  or  to  any  Bull  granting  such  a 
right  to  the  King  of  England. 

There  are  three  genuine  epistles  of  Pope 
Alexander  III.,*  which  relate  to  the  sub- 
mission of  Ireland.  One  dated  Tusculani, 
September  20th,  1172,  to  King  Henry  II., 
to  the  kings  and  princes  of  Ireland,  and 
also  to  Christian,  Archbishop  of  Lismore, 
Legate  of  the  Apostolic  See.  There  is 
another,  which  was  first  published  by  Gir- 
aldus  Cambrensis,  and  is  said  to  have  been 
issued  from  Rome  in  the  year  1172,  but 
this  is  held  to  be  a  forgery,  ior  the  reason 
that  Pope  Alexander  was  not  in  the  Eter- 
nal City  during  that  year,  and  also  because 
the  style  of  the  document  is  widely  diff- 
erent from  that  known  to  be  Pope  Alex- 
ander's. 

la  the  forged  document  of  1172  alone 
is  found  any  mention  of  the  supposed 
"  donation"  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  and  Cam- 
breasis  himself,  in  his  little  work  entitled, 
"  De  Principis  Iiistitutiotie,"  which  was 
re-published  in  1846,  makes  this  confession 
concerning  this  forged  Bull  of  Pope  Alex- 
ander III  : 

"  Sicut  a  quibuidam  impetratum  asseritur  aut 
con/ingitur :  ab  aliit  auiem  unquam  impetratum 
esse  negalur." 

Malone  lays  considerable  stress  on  the 
genuineness  of  this  document  to  which  is 
attached  the  name  of  Alexander  III.,  but 

"Concerning  the  authenticity  of  these  letters 
there  is  a  diversity  of  opinion.  Victor  Palme, 
in  hi*  valuable  historical  es*ay  published  in  the 
Anahfta,  says  of  them  :  "There  is  no  need  to 
discuss  the  authenticity  of  these  three  letters. 
They  have  come  to  us  only  as  copies  and  have 
seen  the  light  of  day  only  after  555  years  from 
their  date,  and  they  contain  invectives  against 
the  Irish  people  such  as  are  never  found  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Holy  See— at  least  as  to  expression 
and  form.  They  announce  things  that  are  evi- 
dently falsa  and  fabricated,  at  d  which  would 
cause  us  to  believe  that  surreptition  and  obrepti- 
tion  had  a  great  deal  to  do  with  them,  even  if 
we  could  suppose  that  their  authenticity  was 
positively  certain.  We  will  assume  that  they 
are  authentic,  but  we  will  on  that  very  account, 
infer  an  argument  that  will  demonstrate  that  the 
false  Bull  of  Adrian  had  even  yet  remained  un- 
known :  Nr>w  none  of  the  three  letters  mention 
the  Bull  of  Adrian,  nor  dcet  any  one  of  them  make 
the  tlightett  allusion  to  it." 


THE      POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


105 


the  most  erudite  critics  reject  it  as  apo- 
chryphal,  nor  did  Jaffe'  include  it  among 
the  Rrgesta  of  that  Pontiff's  Rescripts, 
hence,  concludes  Jungmann,  the  statements 
of  Malone  are  not  correct." 

"  Whether  the  epistle  of  Adrian  IV. ,  was 
published,  proclaimed  or  made  known  in 
the  year  1175  (or  in  1177)  in  somo  synod 
that  was  held  in  Waterford,  is  very  doubt- 
ful. For  Giraldus  Oambrensis,  who  asserts 
that  it  was,  is  very  inaccurate  in  his  rela- 
tion of  historical  facts,  nor  can  much  faith 
be  placed  in  his  statements.  It  is  well 
known,  however,  that  it  was  not  until  to- 
wards the  close  of  the  twelfth  century  that 
the  so-called  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian  IV. 
was  first  made  known,  as  may  be  proved  by 
Giraldus  himself,  who  at  that  period  pub- 
lished his  "  Hibernice  Expngnatio,"  in 
which  it  first  appeared.  From  the  first 
introduction  by  Cambrsnsis,  the  document 
supposed  to  hive  been  given  to  King  Henry 
by  Pope  Adrian,  was  nowhere  published 
until  the  year  1175,  although  there  were 
frequent  opportunities  for  publishing  it, 
hence  it  follows  that  this  document  must 
have  been  purposely  kept  secret,  and  that 
there  were  other  reasons  besides  domestic 
ones,  for  keeping  the  supposed  "  donation" 
document  locked  up. 

THE  "METALOGICUS"  OF  JOHN  OF  SALISBURY 
was  completed  by  its  author  in  1159  or 
1160,  for  he  speaks  therein  of  matters  that 
clearly  refer  to  that  period  as  being  the 
time  when  his  work  saw  the  light  of  day. 
If,  therefore,  John  of  Salisbury  could  speak 
so  positively  of  the  "  donation"  made  by 
Pope  Adrian  IV.  to  King  Henry,  how  does 
it  happen  that  although  the  books  of  Saris- 
berensis  were  known,  there  was  no  mention 
made  of  the  aforesaid  "  donation"  until 
the  year  1175  ?  Several  authors  maintain 
that  the  forty-second  chapter — that  being 
the  portion  of  the  work  in  which  the  "  do- 
nation" of  Ireland  to  King  Henry  is  nar- 
rated— is  an  interpolation.  The  context  of 
the  book  reads  correctly  even  if  the  42nd 
chapter  was  omitted  altogether. 

"Ad  preces  meas  illustri  regi  Anglorum 
Henrico  II.,  dedit  Hiberniam  jure  heredi- 
tario  possidendam,  sicut  literce  testautur  IN 

HODIERNTTM   DIEM." 

The  expression,    "  in   hodiernum  diem," 


suggests  per  se  the  idea  that  there  was  a 
series  of  years  (a  long  interval)  between  the 
issuance  of  the  Adrian  Bull  and  the  pub- 
lication of  the  work  of  Sarisberensis.  Such 
language  is  never  used  to  express  short 
intervals  when  there  is  question  of  his- 
torical fact.  Yet,  only  three  or  four  years 
intervened  (from  1156  to  1159  or  1160) 
between  the  issuing  of  the  supposed  Adrian 
Bull  and  the  completion  of  the  "Metalogi- 
cns."  There  can  be  little  doubt,  therefore, 
that  some  person — for  a  purpose  only  known 
to  themselves — but  which  we  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  may  surmise  from  surround- 
ing circumstances — inserted  the  words  used 
in  the  above  Latin  extract,  without  giving 
due  consideration  to  the  proper  difference 
of  expression  when  designating  a  long  or  a 
short  time. 

John  of  Sarisberensis  died  in  1180,  and 
there  are  many  critics  who  believe  that  the 
whole  42nd  chapter — which  is  entirely  for- 
eign to  the  work — was  added  in  time." 


KING  HENRY'S  OATH  AT  AVRANCHES. 

All  readers  of  the  events  of  the  twelfth 
century  are  familiar  with  the  fact  that  in 
order  to  clear  himself  from  the  charge  of 
being  the  instigator  of  the  murder  of  St. 
Thomas  A'Becket,  it  became  necessary  for 
King  Henry  of  England  to  make  oath  that 
he  was  guiltless  of  that  fearful  crime. 

Some  writers  assert  that  Henry  went  to 
Ireland  in  order  to  escape  from  being  served 
with  the  notice  of  excommunication  which 
Pope  Alexander  III.  had  promulgated 
against  him,  and,  after  waiting  in  that  coun- 
try for  several  months — whilst  his  repre- 
sentatives were  pleading  his  cause  before 
the  Papal  authorities  — he  at  length  received 
a  favorable  report  from  his  friends  and  then 
hastened  at  once  over  to  Avranches,  in 
France,  in  which  country  Pope  Alexander 
then  was,  in  order  to  swear  on  the  Holy 
Gospels,  in  the  Cathedral  of  that  city,  in 
the  presence  of  the  Pope's  Legate,  the 
Cardinals,  Prelates  and  the  people  there 
assembled,  that  he  was  not  guilty  of  any 
crime  which  deserved  excommunication. 

Here  is  the  oath  which  King  Henry  took 
on  that  memorable  occasion,  as  given  by 
both  Baronius  and  Muratori,  and  which 
they  copied  from  the  Vatican  documents: 


10G 


THE      POPE      AND      1UELAND. 


I,  Henry,  swear  on  these  Holy  Gospels  that 
I  did  not  premeditate  the  murder  of  St.  Tboma> ; 
that  I  did  not  know  that  it  waa  going  to  take 
place,  and  that  I  did  not  command  it  to  be  done; 
that  on  hearing  the  account  of  this  crime,  I  fell 
grief  aa  intense  aa  if  I  had  heard  of  the  murder 
of  nay  own  eon.  But  there  is  a  point  that  I  can- 
not excuse  myself  in  regard  to,  viz  :  that  he  was 
put  to  death  in  consequence  of  the  anger  and 
resentment  I  conceived  against  him.  I  appeared 
then  to  have  given  the  occasion  for  hie  death. 
For  this  fault  I  will  send  at  my  own  expense, 
and  without  delay,  two  hundred  cavaliers  to 
Jerusalem,  for  the  defense  of  Christianity,  and 
I  will  maintain  them  there  during  the  year.  I 
will  myself  take  the  Cross  for  three  years,  and  I 
will  net  out  in  person  for  the  Holy  Land,  unless 
the  Sovereign  Pontiff  dispenses  me  in  this 
matter. 

All  the  illicit  customs  that  I  introduced 
during  my  reien  into  my  country,  I  will  remove 
entirely,  and  forbid  them  to  be  practiced  here- 
after. I  will  guarantee  fall  liberty  to  make  ap- 
peals to  the  Apostolic  See,  and  I  will  net  inter- 
fere with  any  person  in  this  matter.  Further- 
more, I,  King,  and  my  beloved  son,  swear  that 
we  will  receive  or  hold  the  Kingdom  of  England 
from  our  Lord  Pope  Alexander  and  from  his 
successors  for  ever,  and  we  will  not  regard  our- 
selves aa  the  ttue  Kings  of  England  until  the 
Pope  or  Popes  look  upon  us  as  Catholic  Kings. 

The  silence  observed  by  King  Henry  con- 
cerning Ireland  in  this  oath,  shows  most 
conclusively  that  Pope  Adrian  did  not  be- 
stow  that  nation  upon  the  English  monarch. 
It  also  proves  that  the  bogus  Bull  had  not 
as  yet  been  evolved  from  the  inventive 
brain  of  whoever  forged  it.  Assuredly 
King  Henry  would  never  have  thought  of 
placing  England  alone  under  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  Holy  See,  if  he  possessed  any 
right  to  Ireland,  especially  when  we  con- 
sider that  the  double  offering  would  have  ma- 
terially assisted  him  in  becoming  reconciled 
to  the  Holy  Father,  in  gaining  absolution 
for  his  admitted  participation  in  the  murder 
of  St.  Thomas,  and  also  in  regaining  the 
prestige  which  he  had  temporarily  lost  by 
the  grave  charge  brought  against  him. 

Again,  it  is  of  record  that  King  Henry 
wrote  to  the  Pope  at  the  end  of  the  same 
year  in  which  he  took  the  above  oath,  ask- 
ing the  assistance  of  his  Holiness  in  a  war 
which  his  eldest  son  was  then  waging  against 
hi tn.  1 11  that  letter  he  again  declares  that 
England  is  tinder  the  jurisdiction  of  the 


Pope,  but   makes  no  mention  whatever  of 
Ireland  occupying  a  similar  position. 

Now  if  any  Pope  had  bestowed  Ireland 
upon  King  Henry,  and  if  that  monarch  was 
feudatory  of  the  Holy  See  in  that  island, 
would  he  have  neglected  to  ask  the  protec- 
tion of  the  Pope  against  the  Irish  "  rebels" 
as  they  were  called,  especially  when  at  that 
juncture  the  EnglUh  monarch  had  lost  near- 
ly every  portion  of  the  land  usurped  by  the 
Norman  invaders  ?  These  points  are  addi- 
tional links  in  the  chain  which  serve  to 
prove  that  the  Adrian  Bull  was  forged  for  the 
purpose  of  procuring  a  fraudulent  title  to 
Ireland. 


POPE     ALEXANDER    NOT     LN    ROME    IN    1172. 

The  Bull  which  is  attributed  to  Pope 
Alexander  III.,  concludes  thus  in  Judge 
Maguire's  bad  book  : 

Given  at  Rome  in  the  year  of  Salvation, 
1172 

Now  let  us  briefly  trace  the  career  of 
Alexander  III.,  in  order  to  prove  beyond 
doubt  that  the  fictitious  Bull  was  never  is- 
sued from  Rome  in  the  year  designated  in 
that  spurious  document. 

Pope  Alexander  was  crowned  at  a  place 
called  Cisterna,  midway  between  Yelletri 
and  Terracina,  in  Italy,  on  Sunday,  Septem- 
ber 20th,  A.  D.,  1159.  The  Holy  Father 
then  fixed  his  residence  at  Terracina,  thence 
he  went  to  the  following  places  in  the  years 
designated.  The  Pope  was  in  Tusculum  in 
1172  ;  in  Segni  in  1173  ;  in  Anagni  in  1176, 
in  Monte  Gargano  in  1177,  then  to  Venice, 
from  whence  he  did  not  reach  Rome  until 
1178. 

The  impossibility,  therefore,  of  this  Bull 
ever  having  emanated  from  Rome  is  fully 
established,  and  its  forgery  clearly  and  suc- 
cessfully proved ! 

Aside,  even  from  the  irrefutable  facts 
we  have  furnished,  we  feel  quite  positive 
that  the  illiberal,  untruthful  and  even  un- 
Christian  document,  miscalled  the  Alexander 
Bull,  never  could  have  emanated  from  a 
Pontiff  who  is  thus  eulogized  by  the  Prot- 
estant critic  Bower : 

"  Most  of  the  contemporary  writers  speak 
of  him  (Alexander)  as  a  man  of  great  pru- 
dence and  discretion.  *  *  *  He  is  said 


THE       POPE       AND       IHELAM). 


107 


to  have  been  the  most  learned  of  all  the 
Popes  that  for  the  space  of  a  hundred  years 
have  presided  in  that  See,  and  better  ac- 
quainted than  any  of  them  with  the  Canon 
Laws  and  Decrees  of  the  Roman  Church." 

Dr.  Miley,  the  distinguished  author  of 
"The  Papal  States,"  says  of  Pope  Alexan- 
der 111.  : — "After  a  protracted  reign  of 
three  and  twenty  years,  during  which  he 
piloted  the  bark  of  Peter  with  such  singular 
wisdom,  skill,  moderation  and  energy,  as  to 
secure  for  it  peace  the  most  profound  and 
glorious,  after  all  sorts  of  storms  and  dan- 


gers—this great  High  Priest  of  the  Church 
and  author  of  Italian  liberty,  Alexander 
III  ,  was  called  to  his  reward,  on  the  30th 
of  August,  A.  D.,  1181." 

That  a  Pope  possessing  such  superior  pru- 
dence, discretion,  learning,  wisdom,  skill, 
energy,  moderation  and  experience,  couUl 
not  subscribe  to  such  a  scurrilous  concoction 
as  the  forgery  said  to  have  been  issued  from 
Rome  in  the  year  1172,  mint  therefore  be  a 
foregone  conclusion  in  the  mind  of  every 
intelligent  reader,  regardless  alike  of  all 
previous  prejudices  or  anti-Catholic  bias. 


CHAPTER      XVIII. 

An  Able  Article  Proving  the  Adraiu  and  Alexander  Bulls  to  be  Forgeries.— Father 
F.  A.  Gasquet's  Learned  Contribution  to  the  "Dublin  Review." — Severe  Strict- 
ures on  the  Spurious  Chapter  Attributed  to  John  of  Salisbury. — The  Genuine 
Letter  of  Pope  Adrain  from  which  the  Bogus  Bull  was  Compiled. 


One  of  the  main  objects  we  had  in  view 
when  we  undertook  the  task  of  proving 
both  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls  to 
be  forgeries,  was  to  compile  under  one 
cover  the  different  contributions  of  learned 
men  who  have  hitherto  written  wisely  and 
well  upon  this  subject.  Already  we  have 
placed  within  reach  of  our  readers  the 
scholarly  essay  of  Cardinal  Moran,  as  well  as 
the  exhaustive  criticism  of  Professors  Palme 
and  Juugmann,  and  now  we  introduce  the 
more  important  portions  of  the  very  inter- 
esting article  which  Rev.  Francis  Aiden 
Gasquet,  O.  S.  B.,  of  St.  Gregory's,  Down- 
side, Bath,  England,  contributed  to  the 
Dublin  Revieiv  in  July  1883,  omitting  only 
those  paragraphs  which  treat  of  facts  that 
have  already  been  introduced  in  evidence  in 
these  pages. 

Father  Gasquet  prints  the  text  of  the 
spurious  Adrian  Bull,  and  then  he  thus 
clearly  and  caustically  criticises  the  bogus 
Bull  itself  as  well  as  the  different  persons 
who  were  in  any  way  connected  with  its 
construction  or  publication. 

FATHER  GASQUET'S  TESTIMONY. 

"This  document,"  [the  Adrian  Bull]  says 
Father  Gasquet,  "  is  not  dated,  but  John 


of  Salisbury,  who  claims  to  have  been  the 
ambassador  who  obtained  it  for  Henry  II., 
gives  the  year  1155  as  the  date  when  it  was 
granted.  There  are  however,  grave,  if  not 
overwhelming,  reasons  for  questioning  the 
value  of  this  testimony,  since  the  biography 
of  Salisbury  makes  it  exceedingly  improba- 
ble that  he  was  ever  entrusted  with  such  a 
mission  to  Rome.  Educated  out  of  Eng- 
land, which  he  left  in  1 137,  John  of  Salis- 
bury did  not  return  to  his  native  country 
until  1149,  and  then  only  for  a  very  short 
time,  as  he  can  be  proved  to  have  returned 
almost  immediately  to  the  Continent,  where 
he  became  occupied  in  teaching  at  Paris. 
It  is  hard  to  believe  that  Henry  would  have 
made  choice  of  an  unknown  and  untried 
m'-iii  to  conduct  so  important  and  difficult  a 
piece  of  diplomacy  as  negotiating  with  the 
Pope  about  the  expedition  to  Ireland. 
This  much  is  certain,  indeed,  that  Henry 
did,  at  the  beginning  of  his  reign,  send 
ambassadors  to  Adrian,  who  was  then  al- 
most at  the  close  of  his  pontificate ;  but 
this  mission  was  given  to  three  bishops  and 
an  abbot — namely,  Rotrodus,*  Bishop  of 
Evreux,  of  whom  we  shall  have  more  to 

*  "  Gallia  Curistiana,"  toiu.  ii.  pp.  557  and  776. 


108 


THK       fOPK       AND       Ii:KI.\Ni>. 


say  ;  Arnold,  Bishop  of  Lisieux  ;  the  Bish- 
op of  Mans ;  and  Robert,  Abbot  of  St. 
Albans.  John  of  Salisbury,  if  he  were 
with  this  embassy,  could  not  have  played 
the  important  part  he  claims  to  have  done, 
but  would  have  gone  only  in  the  capacity  of 
a  simple  clerical  retainer.  It  is  a  curious 
fact  that  the  date  of  this  mission  to  the 
Pope  from  Henry  is  the  same  as  that 
claimed  by  Salisvury  for  his  visit,  A.  D. 
1155 ;  and  it  is  most  unlikely  that  the 
English  king  would  have  sent  two  different 
embassies  at  the  same  time.  The  old 
Chronicles  give  as  the  object  of  the  visit  of 
these  prelates  to  Rome  at  this  time,  the 
wish  of  Henry  to  obtain  from  Adrian  abso- 
lution from  an  oath  made  by  him  to  his 
father  Geoffrey.  Apparently  other  English 
business  was  treated  of  at  the  same  time, 
as  we  judge  from  a  letter  bearing  the  date 
of  February  27,  1155,  written  by  Adrian  to 
the  Scotch  bishops.  Nothing  whatever  ap- 
pears as  to  the  proposed  expedition  to  Ire- 
land. 

Other  circumstances  also  tend  to  throw 
discredit  upon  the  account  given  by  John  of 
Salisbury.  When  he  finished  his  work 
called  "  Polycraticus,"  he  dedicated  it  to 
Thomas,  afterwards  S.  Thomas  A'Becket, 
then  Chancellor  of  England,  who  at  that 
time  was  with  his  royal  master  at  the  siege 
of  Toulouse.  This  was  in  the  year  A.  D. 
1159  ;  and  in  that  year,  apparently  for  the 
first  time,  Salisbury  was  presented  -to  Henry 
by  St.  Thomas.  If,  as  we  may  suppose 
from  this  fact,  he  had  been  up  to  this  time 
unknown  to  the  king,  it  is  most  improbab'e 
thtit  four  years  previously  the  same  monarch 
had  entrusted  him  with  so  private  and  con- 
fidential a  mission  to  Borne. 

Moreover,  although  Salisbury  speaks  in 
the  "Polycraticus"  of  his  having  passed 
three  months  at  Beneventum  with  Pope 
Adrian — a  fact  itself  rendered  most  unlikely 
by  reason  of  the  details  he  gives  of  the  ex- 
traordinary familiarity  with  which  the  Pope 
treated  him — he  makes  no  mention  what- 
ever in  that  work  of  the  important  grant  of 
Ireland  accorded  to  his  petition.  Such  an 
omission  is  all  the  more  curious  because  the 
work  in  question  was  intended  by  its  author 
as  a  moans  of  securing  the  favor  and  patron- 
age of  the  Chancellor ;  and  had  Salisbury 


been  the  means  of   obtaining  for  England 
so  signal  a  favor,  this  mere  fact  would  have 
been  a  certain  pass  to  the  countenance  and 
protection,  not  alone  of  St.  Thomas,  but  of 
King    Henry    himself.     This    omission    is 
sufficient  to  n.ake  us  suspect  either  that  the 
chapter  in  Salisbury's  subsequent  work,  the 
•'Metalogicus,"  in  which  mention   is  made 
of  Adrian's  grant,  w  not  h's  irnrk  nt  all  ;  or 
thnt  the  grant  was  inserted  by  him  at  the  in- 
stance of  the  kiny,  and  to  gain  his  favrr. 
******** 
It   is   linden  iuUe   that   the    forty  second 
chapter  of  the  work  has  absolutely  nothing 
to  do  with  the  rest,  which  had  for  its  object 
the  defence  of  the  study  of  logic  and  meta- 
physics.    The    forty- first    chapter     finishes 
this  subject  in  a  natural  and  Christian  man- 
ner   by    a   quotation    from    the    Book    of 
Wisdom,   and   it   is   a   strange  contrast  in 
the    next  chapter  (forty -second)   to    come 
upon  a  lament  over  the   siege   of   Toulouse 
and   the  evils  likely  to   arise   out  of    the 
quarrel  of  the  two  kings,    oddly   mixed   up 
with  records  of  a  most  unlikely   familiarity 
existing    between  himself   (Salisbury)  and 
Pope  Adrian.     The   Pontiff  is  represented 
as  insisting   on   eating  off  the  same  plate 
with  him  and  drinking  from  the  same  cup, 
while    he    is    supposed   to    have    declared 
publicly  that  he  loved  Salisbury  more  than 
his  own  mother  and  brother.     Thtse  curious 
details    are    immediately   followed   by   the 
declaration  of  Adrian's  gift  of  Ireland,    to 
which  is  added  a  repetition  of  what  he  had 
said  in  the  prologue  about  his  occupation  as 
chancellor  and  secretary  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury.     The  whole  chapter  is  thus 
to  strange  in  itself,  so  different   in   style   to 
the  other   writings   of  John   of  Salisbury, 
and  so  oddly  tacked  on  to  a  work  on  phil- 
osophy, that  it  is  highly  probable  it  was  not 
his  work  ut  all.     This   probability   is    in- 
creased by  the  fact  that  the  circumstances 
of  the  interview  with  Pope  Adrian  described 
in  the  "  Metalogicus"  differ  so   much  from 
those    in    the    "Polycraticus,"    where    no 
mention  is  made  of  Adrian's  donation  ;  nor 
of  the  "  fine  emerald  ring"  sent   from   the 
Pope  to  Henry  to  convey  some  strange  sort 
of  investiture.     Moreover,  the  hand   of  the 
impostor   is  betrayed  by  one  or  two   ex- 
pressions   such    as    "  usque    in    hodiemum 


THE      POPK       AND       IRELAND. 


109 


diem'  and  "jure  hutredituriu  po$tidendenn»" 

Lastly,  if  the  last  chapter  of  the  "Meta- 
logicus"  is  genuine,  it  was  written  about  the 
year  1159,  since  the  illness  of  Archbishop 
Theobald,  who  died  in  1161,  is  mentioned. 
At  latest  the  date  of  the  work  is  1160 ; 
while  it  is  a  matter  beyond  dispute  that  no 
mention  whatever  was  made  by  Henry  of 
this  "grant"  of  Ireland  by  the  Pope  till 
at  earliest  A.  D.  1175,t  or  fifteen  years 
after  it  was  published  in  the  "  Metalogtcus. " 
This  is  inexplicable,  except  on  the  ground 
that  the  chapter  is  a  subsequent  interpola- 
tion in  order  to  give  color  to  Henry's  claim 
on  Ireland.  We  must  here  note  that  the 
possession  of  such  a  "  Bull"  would  have 
been  most  useful  to  Henry  in  1167,  when 
his  followers  first  joined  Dearmaid,  in  order 
to  justify  English  interference  ;  it  was  of 
vital  importance  when  he  went  over  to  re- 
ceive the  homage  of  the  Irish,  and  could 
never  have  been  withheld  or  concealed  at 
the  Council  of  Cashel  in  1172,  at  which  the 
Papal  legate  presided.  Such  silence  can 
only  mean  that  the  "Bull"  did  not  exist, 
and  as  yet  Henry  was  unable  to  forge  it  for 
a  reason  which  will  be  obvious  later. 
*  *  *  *  *  *  *  * 
We  may  here  note  a  strong  confirmation 
of  our  doubts  as  to  the  authentic  character 
of  Pope  Adrian's  "grant,"  even  if  the  sub- 
sequent "  Bull"  of  Alexander  is  not  also 
affected.  Directly  the  murder  of  St.  Thom- 
as became  known,  Henry  crossed  over  to 
Ireland  with  the  object  apparently  of  pre- 
venting the  anger  of  the  Pope  finding  him 
out  by  letters  of  excommunication  or  inter- 
dict. For  five  months  a  strict  watch  was 
kept  on  all  vessels  coming  from  the  Contin- 
ent, and  not  a  ship  was  allowed  to  reach 
the  Irish  coast,  even  from  England,  without 
the  king's  knowing  that  it  was  not  convey- 
ing any  Papal  letters.  Directly  a  favorable 
message  was  brought  to  him  at  Wexford  he 
set  out  at  once,  and,  crossing  England, 
passed  over  into  Normandy.  There,  in  the 
cathedral  of  Avranches,  on  the  Sunday  be- 
fore the  Assumption,  1172,  Henry  swore 
on  the  Gospels,  in  the  presence  of  the  le- 
gates, bishops,  barons  and  people,  that  he 
was  not  guilty  of  the  murder  of  the  Arch- 

t "  Cambrensis  Eversus,"  vol.  ii.  p.  440,  not*. 


bishop.  This  oath,  taken  under  such  sol- 
emn circumstances,  included  the  placing  of 
the  kingdom  of  England  under  the  Pope, 
and  the  oath  of  fealty  for  it  to  Alexander.  £ 
Had  Ireland  at  this  time  been  really  given 
to  England  by  the  Holy  See,  under  such 
circumstances  as  these  it  would  have  been 
mentioned.  This,  however,  is  not  the  case. 
"  Praeterea  ego,"  runs  the  oath,  "  et  major 
filius  meus  rex  juramus,  quod  a  Domno 
Alexandro  Papa,  et  ejus  Catholicia  success- 
oribus  recipiemus  et  tenebimus  regnum 
Anglian,  et  nos  et  nostri  successores  in  per- 
pecuum  non  reputabimus  nos  Angl'ue  veros 
reges  donee  ipse  nos  Catholicos  reges  tenu- 
erint."  In  the  following  year  Henry  wrote 
to  Pope  Alexander  by  his  secretary,  Peter 
of  Blois,  and  referred  to  his  holding  Eng- 
land as  a  fief  under  the  Holy  See,  but 
neither  in  this  is  there  any  mention  of  Ire- 
land^ These  two  facts  are  strong  confirma- 
tion of  any  suspicions  of  the  genuineness 
of  Pope  Adrian's  Bull. 

We  have  shown  that  the  evidence  in  favor 
of  the  authentic  character  of  the  Papal 
grant  of  Ireland  to  the  English  Crown  must 
be  accepted  with  extreme  caution,  if  not 
with  positive  suspicion  The  authorities 
upon  which  it  has  been  so  long  received  by 
English  historians  as  a  strange  but  true 
fact,  prove,  on  examination,  to  be  hardly 
reliable  sources  of  information.  Many  ex- 
ternal circumstances,  as  well  as  the  inher- 
ent, intrinsic  improbability  of  the  "grant,  ' 
confirm  the  impartial  mind  in  objecting  to 
receive  it  as  undoubted  history.  Moreover, 
the  labors  of  the  editor  of  the  Analecta 
have  now  made  it  possible  to  show  with 
reason  that  Adrian  IV.,  so  far  from  giving 
any  encouragement  to  Henry  in  his  designs 
on  Ireland,  in  reality  refused,  when  asked, 
to  be  a  party  to  the  enterprise,  and  pointed 
out  the  injustice  of  it.  The  idea  of  effect- 
ing the  conquest  of  the  island  had  sug- 
gested itself  to  the  Conqueror  and  to  Henry 
L,  and  it  was  but  natural  that  the  project 
should  revive  in  the  restless  mind  of  Henry 
II.  It  must  have  been  evident,  however, 

.t  The  clause  in  the  oath  is  not  found  in  John 
of  Salisbury's  account ;  but  Barouius  inserts  it 
as  found  in  the  Vatican  Archives.  Also  Mura- 
t'iriot  "  Keruoi  Italicarum  Scriptores,"  torn.  iii. 
463. 

§  Lingard,  vol.  ii.  p.  191,  note. 


no 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


that  "an  Eniflixh  l\>pv  would  of  necfxsity  be 
cautious  in  favoring  any  pretensions  of  his 
own"  countrymen  against  a  neighboring 
country.  The  knowledge  that  Adrian's  ap- 
proval would  in  all  probability  be  withheld, 
if  the  idea  was  started  as  an  English 
scheme,  seems  to  have  obliged  Henry  to 
look  for  some  other  sovereign  to  help  him 
in  obtaining  the  authorization  of  the  Pon- 
tiff for  his  design,  and  Louis  VII.  of  France 
was  clearly  the  only  prince  in  a  position  to 
render  him  this  service.  On  the  theory  that 
for  this  purpose  Henry  wanted  to  make  a  tool 
of  Louis,  we  can  explain  a  fact  that  has  ap- 
peared to  puzzle  annalists—  namely,  why  it 
was  that  these  two  kings,  who  had  been  for  a 
longtime  avowed  enemies,  suddenly,  and  by 
the  advances  of  Henry,  became  fast  friends, 
just  at  this  very  period,  A.  D.,  1158.  After 
many  years  of  war  and  contention  Henry 
met  Louis  at  Rouen,  and  not  only  made 
peace,  but  espoused  his  son  to  the  infant 
daughter  of  the  French  King.  The  Pope 
wrote  to  the  Chancellor  of  Louis  to  convey 
his  congratulations  to  the  two  sovereigns  on 
their  complete  reconciliation.  The  two  pro- 
ceeded together  to  Paris,  and  afterwards 
made  a  joint  pilgrimage  to  Mount  St. 
Michael's  in  Normandy.*  So  complete  was 
their  reconciliation  that  at  this  time  they 
despatched  a  joint  mission  to  Rome  to  ask 
Adrian's  blessing  and  approval  of  a  hostile 
expedition  they  were  intending  to  make  to- 
gether. The  choice  of  an  Eng  ishman  as 
an  ambassador  seems  to  point  to  the  fact 
that  the  projected  enterprise  was  of  more 
importance  to  the  English  than  to  the 
French  King.  Rotrodus,  the  envoy  select- 
ed^ was  at  that  time  (A.  D.  1158)  Bishop  of 
Evreux,  and  had  been  one  of  the  witnesses 
of  the  reconciliation  between  the  two  kings  £ 
He  was  much  attached  to  the  interests  of  the 
English  King,  and  had,  from  the  time  of 
his  coronation,  at  which  he  assisted,  been 
employed  in  several  missions  for  his  royal 
master.  Amongst  others,  as  we  have  noted 
before,  he  was  in  the  embassy  despatched  to 
Rome  by  Henry  in  1155.  It  was  thus  a 
courtier  of  Henry  who  was  sent  on  this  joint 
mission  from  the  two  monarch*. 

•Mitne,  "  Patrol."  torn.  clx.  p.  484. 
t "  Ga'lia  Christiana,"  torn.   ii.  p.  776.      See 
aloo  the  Pope's  letter  in  reply. 
£  "Gallia  Chmtiana,"*tom.  iv.  p.  633. 


"  Rotrodus  arrived  in  Rome  at  the  close 
of  the  year  1158.  or  the  beginning  of  the 
following  year,  and  informed  the  Pope  of 
the  project  entertained  by  Henry  and  Louis. 
What  this  project  was  does  not  absolutely 
appear,  but  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  it 
was  really  the  invasion  of  Ireland  upon 
which  the  mind  of  Henry  was  intent.  In 
order  to  give  color  to  the  pretensions  it  was 
necessary  to  represent  it  as  being  intended 
in  reality  as  a  crusade  in  favor  of  religion. 
The  Pope,  however,  would  not  enter  into 
the  designs  of  the  two  kings,  and  refused  to 
be  a  party  to  such  an  injustice.  He  not  only 
refused  the  request  of  Bishop  Rotrcdus,  but 
wrote  to  Louis  at  some  length  to  point  out 
the  reasons  that  compelled  him  to  take  this 
course.  On  this  letter  can  be  based  many 
arguments  to  show  that  the  attitude  of  Ad- 
rian towards  the  proposals  of  the  English 
King  as  regards  Ireland  was  one  of  strong 
disapproval,  and  that  granting  that  this  let- 
ter refers  to  Ireland,  it  would  be  impossible 
for  Adrian  to  have  issued,  very  much  about 
the  same  time,  the  "  Bull''  of  donation  at 
the  request  of  Jo^.n  of  Salisbury. 

"In  the  first  place,  the  Pope's  letter 
shows  clearly  enough  that  his  consent 
had  been  asked  solely  on  the  ground 
that  the  expedition  had  a  religious 
character,  and  the  fact  of  the  reply 
being  addressed  to  Louis  would,  probably 
only  prove  that  Henry  had  taken  care  not 
to  be  too  prominent  in  the  business  for  fear 
that  the  real  motive  might  become  too  ap- 
parent to  the  English  Pope.  Adrian  pro- 
ceeds to  say  that  he  could  not  give  consent  to 
any  project  of  such  a  nature,  unless  he  were 
certain  that  the  people  and  clergy  of  the  conn- 
try  ivanted  foreign  interference.  This,  be  it 
remarked,  is  a  very  different  sentiment  to 
that  with  which  the  same  Pope  is  credited 
in  the  alleged  "Bull,"  The  various  dan- 
gers which  Louis  is  likely  to  run  are  then 
pointed  out  to  him  by  the  Pope,  and  for 
every  reason  he  concludes  not  to  give  him 
any  "  Bull"  encouraging  the  project  until 
such  time  as  he  has  warned  the  people  of  the 
kingdom  of  the  intention  of  the  two  kings,  in 
order  to  see  whether  they  will  co-operate 
with  them.  In  conclusion  the  Pontiff  begs 
the  king  to  reflect  well  on  the  matter,  and 


THB       POPE       AND       IRBLAN*. 


Ill 


not  to  undertake  the  enterprise  before  consult- 
ing the  Bishops  and  cleray  of  the  country 

"It  is  well  at  once  to  declare  that  the 
great  difficulty  in  fixing  the  reference  of  this 
letter  to  the  design  of  invading  Ireland  is 
the  fact  that  the  country  is  not  mentioned 
by  name.  Unfortunately,  it  was  a  com- 
mon custom  in  the  transcription  of  docu- 
ments to  write  only  the  initial  letter  of 
proper  names.  Thus,  in  this  letter  the  en- 
voy is  called  "  R. "  Bishop  of  Evreux,  and 
the  country  the  two  kings  were  anxious  to 
obtain  the  Pope's  approval  to  invade  is  only 
"  El,"'  which  may  stand  equally  well  for 
"  Hispania"  and  "  Hibernia."  We  are  thus 
left  to  the  internal  evidence  of  the  docu- 
ment itself  to  determine  to  which  of  these 
two  countries  it  has  reference.  Dr.  Lin- 
gard  was  apparently  aware  of  the  existence 
of  the  letter, §  but  it  did  not  suggest  itself 
so  his  mind  that  it  had  any  reference  to  Ire- 
land. He  says  :  "  When  Louis  a  few  years 
later  (1159)  meditated  a  similar  expedition 
into  Spain,  and  for  that  purpose  requested 
the  "  consilium  et  favorem  Romance  Ec- 
clesiee,"  the  answer  was  very  different. 
Adrian  dissuaded  him  because  it  was  "  in- 
consulta  ecclesia  et  populo  teme  illius." 

"  It  is,  however,  clearly  shown  in  the 
Analecta  that  it  is  impossible  that  this  letter 
of  Adrian,  addressed  to  the  two  kings,  can 
have  any  reference  to  Spain,  while  every 
circumstance  in  it  tending  to  fix  the  special 
country,  gives  weight  to  the  opinion  that  it 
was  Ireland  about  which  the  Pope  wrote. 
It  the  first  place,  the  document  refers  not 
to  a  kingdom  (regnum)  but  to  a  country 
(terra).  Now  Ireland  was  not  recognized  as 
a  kingdom  officially  till  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, and  in  all  formal  papers  before  that 
time  it  is  constantly  spoken  of  as  a  country 
(terra)  merely.  Spain,  on  the  other  hand, 
was  at  this  time  divided  into  three  kingdoms 
— Castile,  Aragon  and  Galicia  ;  and  the 
most  powerful,  the  King  of  Castile,  had  the 
title  of  Emperor.  King  Louis  of  France 
had  only  a  year  or  two  before  the  date  of 
the  letter  (1155)  made  a  pilgrimage  to  St. 
James,  and  was  well  received  by  his  father- 
in-law  the  Emperor  of  Castile.] |  Hence,  not 

§•'  History,"  vol.  ii.  p.  178,  5th  ed.,  note, 
i Robertas  de  Monte.     Migne,  "Patrol."  torn, 
clx.  p.  478. 


only  have  we  the  official  title  of  Spain  to  be 
a  kingdom  at  the  time  when  Adrian  wrote, 
but  it  is  impossible  to  suppose  that  Louis 
could  have  been  so  ignorant  of  the  feelings 
of  a  country  in  which  he  had  not  long  be- 
fore been  journeying,  and  over  which  his 
own  father-in-law  reigned  as  Emperor. 

"Again,  the  country  referred  to  in  Adrian's 
letter  clearly  had  many  princes  or  chiefs, 
which  was  quite  true  of  Ireland  but  not  of 
Spain,  about  the  state  of  which  the  Pope 
could  not  be  ignorant.  It  also,  undoubtedly, 
must  have  posesssed  its  own  episcopal  hier- 
archy, capable  of  free  deliberation;  for  Adri- 
an advises  Louis  and  Henry  to  consult  the 
Bishops  and  Clergy  as  to  their  wish  to  receive 
foreign  intervention  in  their  affairs.  The 
Church  in  that  part  of  Spain,  at  this  time 
overrun  by  the  Moors,  had  almost  disap- 
peared, and  for  the  rest  it  would  have  been 
quite  unnecessary  to  ask  the  advice  of  the 
Spanish  Bishops  as  to  punishing  their  op- 
pressors. On  the  other  hand,  the  Holy  See 
must  have  been  well  acquainted  with  the 
flourishing  state  of  the  Church  in  Ireland  at 
this  period.  During  the  hundred  and  fifty 
years  which  preceded  the  reign  of  Henry 
II.,  numerous  and  well-attended  Councils 
had  been  held  for  the  maintaince  of  disci- 
pline and  regulation  of  morals.  Only  a  few 
years  before  Henry  made  his  first  attempt 
on  the  country,  several  great  and  renowned 
Irish  saints  occupied  Sees  in  the  coun- 
try, and  a  great  Council  was  held  at 
Athboy  at  which  13,000  representatives 
of  the  nation  attended  to  hear  what 
the  Church  commanded.  That  Adrian 
must  have  known  the  state  of  the  Church 
is  rendered  all  the  more  likely  since  he 
had  studied  in  Paris  under  a  celebrated  Irish 
professor,  Marianus,  afterwards  a  monk  of 
Ratisbon,  for  whom  he  conceived  a  great 
affection.  It  was  only  to  be  expected, 
therefore,  that  if  he  had  this  knowledge  of 
the  Irish  Church,  he  should  require  that  the 
Bishops  and  Clergy  be  consulted  as  to  the 
propriety  of  such  an  invasion  as  the  French 
and  English  kings  contemplated. 

"It  musb  be  remembered,  also,  that 
Adrian  desires  that  the  people  of  the  coun- 
try be  consulted,  a  thing  impossible  in  the 
portions  of  Spain  in  possession  of  the  Sara- 
cens. He  also,  throughout,  repeats  his 


112 


IIII.        pnl'i:       AND       IHELAND. 


doubts  as  to  the  utility  and  necessity  of  the 
enterprise  proposed  by  the  kings,  which 
would  certainly  not  have  been  the  case  had 
their  wish  been  merely  to  drive  the  infidel 
out  of  Spain.  It  is  obvious  that  Adrian, 
like  all  his  predecessors,  would  have  been 
only  too  glad  to  grant  protection  to  the 
kingdoms  of  France  and  England,  had  the 
wish  of  the  kings  been  merely  to  fight 
against  the  Moors  in  Spain. 

"Lastly,  a  comparison  of  the  allfgcd 
41  Bull"  of  Adrian  and  the  authentic  letter 
brings  out  one  or  two  strange  facts.  In  the 
first  place,  the  document,  as  given  by  Giral- 
dus,  does  not  express  the  name  or  even  the 


initial  of  the  prince  to  whom  it  was  granted: 
"  Adrianus  episcopus  servus  servorum  Dei, 
carisaimo  in  Christi  filio  illustri  anglorura 
regi  salutem."  Next,  the  preamble  of  the 
"  Bull"  is  almost  word  for  word  the  same  as 
that  of  the  letter  written  to  Louis  VII.,  in 
1159,  and  although  it  might  happen  that  a 
few  words  of  the  two  official  documents 
would  be  the  same,  there  is  no  other  example 
of  such  a  singular  similarity,  extending,  as 
it  does,  over  ten  or  fifteen  lines.  As  this 
curious  fact  is  the  basis  of  a  theory  we  shall 
state  in  brief,  to  account  for  the  forgery  of 
the  ''Bull''  of  Adrian,  it  is  worth  reproduc- 
ing the  two  documents  in  order  that  our 
readers  may  judge  for  themselves. 


ADRIAN  8   LETTER  TO   LOUIS    VII. 

Satis  laudabiliter  et  fructuose  de  Chris- 
tiano  nomine  propagando  in  terris,  et 
se  tern  se  beatitudims  puemio  tibi  cumulando 
in  ccelis,  tua  videtur  magnificentia  cogitare, 
dum  ad  dilatandos  terminos  populi  Chris- 
tiani,  ad  paganorum.  barbariem  debellandam 
et  ad  gentes  apostatrices,  et  q»je  catholic* 
fidei  refugiunt  nee  recipiunt  veritatem, 
Christianorum  jugo  et  ditioni  subdendas, 
simul  cum  charissirao  filio  nostro  Henrico  il- 
lustri Anglorum  regi,  in  H.  properare  inten- 
dis,  et  studes  assidue  (ut  opus  hoc  felicem 
exitum  sortiatur)  exercitum  ut  quae  sunt 
itineri  necessaria  congregare.  Atque  ad  id 
convenientius  exsequendum,  matris  tuje 
sacrosanctsB  Romance  Ecclesiae  consilium 
exigis  et  favorem.  Quod  quidem  proposi- 
turn  tanto  magis  gratum  acceptumque  ten- 
emus,  et  amplius  sicut  commendandum  est, 
commendamus,  quanto  de  sinceriore  charita- 
tis  radice  talem  intentionem  et  votum  tarn 
laudabile  processum  credimus,  ac  de  majori 
ardore  fidei  et  religionis  amore  propositum 
et  desiderium  tuum  principium  habuerunt. 


"  BULL'     TO  HENRY   II. 

Laudabiliter  satis  et  fructuose  de  glorioso 
nomine  propagando,  in  terris,  et  setern» 
felicitatis  praemio  cumulando  in  coelis,  tua 
magnificentia  cugitat;  dura  ad  dilatandos  Ec- 
clesiie  terminos  ad  declarandum  indoctis  et 
rndibus  populis  Christiana?  tidei  veritatem  et 
vitiorum,  plaiitaria  de  agro  Dominico  extir- 
panda,  sicut  catholicus  princeps  intendis ; 
et  ad  id  convenientius  exsequendum  con- 
silium Apostolicse  sedis  exigis,  et  favorem. 
In  quo  facto,  quanto  altiori  consilio  et  ma- 
jori discretione  procedis,  tanto  in  eo  feli- 
ciorem  progressuin  te,  pnestante  Domino, 
confidimus  habiturum  ;  eo  quod  ad  bonum 
exitum  semper  et  finem  solent  attingere,  quee 
de  ardore  fidei  et  religionis  amore,  princi- 
pium acceperunt,  etc.  Significasti  sequi- 
dem  nobis,  fili  in  Christo  carissime,  te  Hi- 
bernise  insulam.  ad  subdendum  ilium  popu- 
lum  legibus  et  vitiorum  plantaria  inde  ex- 
tirpanda,  velle  intrare,  etc.  NOB  itaque, 
pium  et  laudabile  desiderium  tuum  cum 
favore  congruo  prosequentes,  et  petitioni 
bona)  benignum  impendences  assensum, 
gratum  et  acceptum  habemus,  ut  pro  dila- 
tandis  Ecclesia?  termiriis,  pro  vitiorum  re- 
stringendo  decursu,  pro  corrigendis  moribus, 
et  virtutibus  inserendis,  pro  Christiana?  reli- 
gionis augmento,  insulam  illam  ingrediaris. 


"  It  is  almost  impossible  to  compare  the 
two  documents  here  given  without  coming 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  similiarity  is  not 
the  result  of  a  mere  accident.  The  idea  con- 
sequently suggests  itself  as  possible  that  the 
text  of  Adrian's  actual  refusal,  as  conveyed 
to  the  kings  in  the  letter  brought  back  by 
Rotrodus  to  Louis,  was  made  to  serve  as  the 
basis  of  the  forged  "Bull."  What  is  certain 
about  the  matter  is,  that  Louis  and  Henry 


having  applied  to  the  Pope  for  his  approba- 
tion of  a  proposed  invasion  of  a  country 
called  by  its  initial  letter  "H."  the  Holy 
Father  refused  to  grant  any  such  approba- 
tion, and  grounded  his  refusal  upon  reasons 
similar  to  those  by  which  he  is  supposed, 
about  the  same  time,  to  have  been  induced 
to  grant  permission  to  Henry  to  invade  Ire- 
land. The  two  documents  are  strangely  like 
in  form  and  expression,  and  every  oircum- 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


113 


stance,  by  which  the  country  referred  to  by 
the  letter  "  H"  may  be  identified,  points  to 
the  conclusion  that  it  also  was  meant  to  re- 
fer to  the  proposed  Irish  expedition.  Of 
course,  had  Adrian  really  refused  the  per- 
mission asked  for,  as  he  clearly  did  in  his 
letter  to  Louis,  the  French  king  would  have 
known  that  any  pretended  permission  was  a 
forgery ;  and  had  the  refusal  been  intended 
to  prevent  any  expedition  to  Ireland,  the 
"  Bull"  which  is  supposed  to  have  sanc- 
tioned it,  could  never  have  been  produced 
during  the  lifetime  of  the  French  king.  A 
reference  to  dates  will  show  that  this  is  so, 
and  that  all  mention  of  the  existence  of  the 
document  was  carefully  avoided  before  the 
year  A.  D.  1180,  when  Louis  died.*  The 
silence  which  was  kept  for  so  many  years 
about  so  important  a  document,  and  one 
which  would  have  been  so  useful  to  Henry, 
has  often  been  remarked  upon  as  suspicious, 
and  has  puzzled  many  historians  to  explain. 
May  it  not  be  accounted  for  by  the  knowl- 
edge that  such  a  forgery  would  be  at  once 
detected  by  Louis  ? 

"  In  fact,  although   the  secret   of  the  ne- 

*In  A.  D.  1177,  Henry  was  chosen  to  arbitrate 
between  two  Spanish  kings.  In  this  office  he 
Btyled  himself  "  King  of  England,  Duke  of  Nor- 
mandy and  Aquitaine,  and  Count  of  Anjou  " 
No  mention  is  made  of  Ireland  (Rymer,  torn.  i). 


gotiations  of  Rotrodus  with  Adrian  in  be- 
half of  Henry  and  Louis  was  kept  so  well, 
that  the  text  of  the  Pope's  refusal  was  until 
lately  almost  unknown,  still  the  annalist  of 
Anchin,  who  continued  the  chronicle  of  Sige- 
bert,  appears  to  have  had  some  suspicion  of 
the  fact.  Speaking  of  the  year  A.  D.  1171, 
about  the  preparations  made  by  Henry  for 
the  invasion  of  Ireland,  he  says  :t  —"Henry, 
King  of  England,  puffed  up  with  pride, 
and  usurping  things  not  conceded;  striving 
for  things  he  had  no  business  to  do,  pre- 
pared ships  and  called  together  the  soldiers 
of  his  kingdom  to  conquer  Ireland." 

"Whether  this  theory  as  to  the  origin  of 
the  "  Bull"  be  correct  or  not,  it  can  safely 
be  said  that  the  evidence  upon  which  the 
authenticity  of  the  document  has  so  long 
been  held  is  at  best  very  doubtful  and  should 
be  accepted  with  extreme  caution.  A  careful 
examination  will,  we  believe,  induce  most 
inquires  to  reject  the  "Bull"  as  em  un- 
doubted  forgery,  and  to  consider  it  more 
than  probable  that  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  so  far 
from  granting  any  approbation  to  Henry  in 
his  designs  on  Ireland  or  making  any  dona- 
tion of  that  country  to  the  English  crown, 
in  reality  positively  refused  to  be  a  party  to 
such  an  injustice." 

fMigne,  "P<»trologie,"  tome  clx.  p.  SU7. 


114 


THK       POl'K       AND       IRELAND. 


CHAPTER    XIX. 

English  Translation  of  Pope  Adrian's  Letter  to  King  Louis  VII.  of  France. — The 
I'.'pe's  Refusal  to  allow  Ireland  to  be  Invaded. — A  Comparison  Between  the 
Wording  of  the  Letter  and  the  Text  of  the  Spurious  Bull.— Reasons  why  the 
Fraud  was  not  Exposed  in  Past  Centuries. 


The  portion  of  the  Latin  text  of  the 
Letter  which  Pope  Adrian  IV.  sent  to 
King  Louis  VII.  of  France,  which  we 
have  already  laid  before  our  readers,  will 
reveal  at  once  the  corner-stone  upon  which 
the  fraudulent  Bull,  falsely  attributed  to 
Pope  Adrian  IV.  was  founded. 

On  this  point  there  can  be  no  doubt 
whatever,  as  the  Latin  text  which  we  pub- 
lished in  last  week's  issue  clearly  shows  the 
close  copying  of  the  forger  of  the  fraudu- 
lent document  from  the  original  text  of 
the  Letter  which  was  purposely,  and  with 
malice  aforethought,  concealed  by  King 
Henry  in  the  secret  archives  of  Winchester 
Castle. 

The  genuine  Letter  which  Pope  Adrian 
sent  to  King  Louis  VII.  of  France  is  given 
by  Mansi  as  well  as  by  Migne,  and  as 
the  history  of  that  important  document 
will  throw  considerable  light  upon  the 
forged  Bull,  we  append  it  for  the  better 
understanding  of  the  question  at  issue. 

It  is  most  likely  that  it  was  on  the 
occasion  of  the  alliance  between  the  two 
royal  families  of  France  and  England,  and 
at  the  meeting  in  Paris  in  the  year  1158, 
of  the  two  monarchs — Louis  VII.  of 
France  and  Henry  II.  of  England— that 
these  two  ambitious  rulers  came  to  the 
determination  that  the  invasion  of  Ireland 
would  not  only  give  congenial  employment 
to  a  vast  number  of  restless  men  of  martial 
mien  in  both  kingdoms,  but  that  such  an 
enterprise  would  also  redound  to  the  re- 
nown of  the  allied  monarchs,  for  the  reason 
that  hitherto  Ireland,  though  often  invad- 
ed, had  never  been  conquered. 

Both  kinsrs  had  in  their  respective  do- 
minions large  numbers  of  knights  and  veter- 
ans whose  only  trade  was  war,  and  who 
were  becoming  restless  for  want  of  an 
opportunity  to  prove  their  prowess  upon 
some  battlefield,  either  as  invaders  of  some 


foreign  shore  or  as  adventurers  in  extend- 
ing the  possessions  of  the  respective  mon- 
archies under  whose  flag  they  gloried  in 
fighting. 

It  was  necessary,  therefore,  to  find  some 
congenial  employment  for  these  martial 
spirits,  many  of  whom  had  accompanied 
King  Louis  himself,  when,  in  1145,  that 
monarch  in  conjunction  with  Conrad  III., 
of  Germany,  undertook  to  aid  in  capturing 
Jerusalem  from  the  Mussulmans,  but  were 
ingloriously  defeated  through  the  treachery 
of  the  Greeks,  at  the  loss  of  four- fifths  of 
their  forces. 

In  all  probability  the  suggestion  for  the 
invasion  of  Ireland  was  made  by  King 
Henry,  as  such  a  scheme  seems  to  have 
been  brooding  in  his  brain  for  years  previ- 
ously. So  when  King  Louis  heard  the 
proposition,  he  discovered  at  once  a  mili- 
tary enterprise  which  would  furnish  occupa- 
tion for  the  thousands  of  restless  military 
heroes  who  were  compelled  to  idleness 
through  peace. 

King  Louis,  therefore,  commenced  at 
once  to  call  together  his  troops,  to  procure 
munitions  of  war,  prepare  vessels  for  the 
voyage,  and  to  make  all  necessary  prepa- 
rations for  invading  Ireland.  In  order, 
however,  to  conform  to  the  custom  of  the 
age,  Louis  deemed  it  right  and  proper  to 
address  a  diplomatic  document  to  Pope 
Adrian  IV.,  in  order  to  acquaint  him  with 
the  contemplated  project,  as  well  as  to  ask 
the  reigning  Pontiff  to  extend  his  paternal 
blessing  upon  the  enterprise,  and  to  issue  a 
Bull  of  Indulgences  similar  to  those  ap- 
plied to  the  Crusaders,  so  that  the  martial 
valor  of  the  French  military  forces  might 
be  aroused,  and  success  crown  the  dual 
scheme  of  the  French  and  English  plotters 
against  the  peace  of  the  Irish  people. 

Pope  Adrian  replied  to  the  letter  of  King 
Louis,  but  not  in  the  affirmative  manner 


THE       POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


115 


that  monarch  anticipated.  So  far  from 
encouraging  and  blessing  the  enterprise, 
the  Holy  Father  forbv.de  such  a  contemplited 
act  of  injustice  against  the  Irish  people. 

After  proving  to  the  King  of  France, 
by  a  very  apt  illustration,  that  an  act  or 
project,  in  order  to  be  acceptable  to  Al- 
mighty God,  and  beneficial  to  those  who 
might  successfully  accomplish  such  a  scheme, 
should  be  good  in  every  respect,  and  that 
any  deviation  from  the  line  marked  out  by 
Heaven  for  its  justice  and  propriety — 
would  render  such  acts  and  such  projects 
unfit  to  be  offered  to  God.  The  same 
teaching  is  expressed  by  all  theologians  in 
this  maxim:  " Bonum  enim  ex  inteyra 
causa;  malum  vero  ex  quolibet  defectu." 

The  just  and  holy  Pontiff  defines  the 
King's  duty  as  a  Catholic  prince,  and  then 
Adrian  the  Just  gives  this  sage  counsel  to 
the  French  King : 

"Furthermore,  it  appears  to  be  neither 
wise  nor  safe  to  enter  for  the  object  named 
into  a  territory  belonging  to  other  people, 
without  first  consulting  Ihe  wishes  of  tlw 
princes  and  people  of  that  territory.  But 
you,  as  We  have  been  informed,  have  all 
arrangements  made,  and  are  most  eager  to 
make  the  journey,  without  having  consult- 
ed the  Church  or  the  princes  of  the  country 
that  you  are  so  anxious  to  enter.  Uiider 
no  consideration  should  you  attempt  any- 
thing of  the  kind  until  the  necessity  for 
so  doing  is  made  manifest  to  you  by  the 
princes  of  the  country,  and  until  you  are 
invited  by  them  for  the  purpose  specified. 

Because  We  love  with  all  the  intensity  of 
Our  heart  your  honor  and  exaltation,  it  is 
Our  wish  that  you  enter  into  no  such  project 
unless  a  reasonable  cause  exists  for  so 
doing,  and  through  this  Letter  We  urge 
your  Excellency  to  find  out  from  the 
Princes  of  the  country  if  there  be  a  neces- 
sity for  carrying  out  this  project  of  yours, 
and  also  to  enquire  diligently  what  are  the 
wishes  not  only  of  the  princes  but  also  of 
the  Church  and  the  people  of  the  country 
in  regard  to  the  journey  you  are  contem- 
plating, and  to  be  directed— as  is  just — by 
their  wishes.* 

*"TJnde  quia  DOS  honorem  et  incrementum 
tuum  tota  mentis  intentione  diligimns  et  nihil 
tale  aggredi,  nisi  ratioiiabili  causa  exi^ente  vel- 


"  After  you  shall  have  done  all  that  We 
urge  to  be  done  in  this  matter,"  continues 
the  Pope,  "if  you  should  find  that  there 
is  a  necessity  for  the  journey,  that  is,  that 
the  Church  of  the  country  advises  you  to 
undertake  it,  and  the  princes  call  on  you  • 
for  help,  and  unite  their  counsel  to  that  of 
the  Church  for  the  same  purpose,  you  may, 
under  such  circumstances,  proceed  <o  act 
and  carry  out  your  laudable  intention,  and 
God's  blessing  shall  accompany  your  ef- 
forts, "t 

"But  should  you  enter  the  country  under 
any  other  circumstances,  it  would  be  to  be 
feared  that  your  journey  would  be  unfruit- 
ful, and  would  not  lead  to  the  end  desired. 
The  princes  themselves,  and  the  people  of 
the  country,  would  be  annoyed  and  op- 
pressed by  such  an  entrance  as  your  project 
implies,  if  there  were  no  necessity  for  its 
execution,  and  We  Ourselves  might  be 
regarded,  for  many  reasons,  as  being  rather 
capricious  in  the  matter.  For,  your  Ex- 
cellency ought  to  consider,  and  remember 
how,  on  another  occasion,  when  both  Con- 
rad of  happy  memory,  formerly  King  of 
the  Romans,  and  yourself,  unwisely  under- 
took— without  consulting  the  people  of  the 
country — the  Jerusalem  project,  you  both 
failed  to  reap  the  advantages  you  looked 
for,  and  what  detriment  and  injury  came 
upon  the  Church  of  God,  and  the  whole 
Christian  people,  from  that  expedition. 
Indeed,  the  Holy  See  suffered  not  a  little 
from  its  having  advised  and  helped  you  in 
that  business,  and  all  cried  out  with  much 
indignation  against  it,  declaring  that  it  was 
the  cause  of  the  whole  calamity. 

"  In  fine,  follow  in  the  matter  before  us 
for  consideration,  that  counsel  which  you 
know  should  be  observed  according  to  the 
dictates  of  right  reason. " 

The  wise  and  just  Pontiff  concludes  his 

lemus,  sublimitati  tuae  presentibus  nuademu*  nt 
prius  necesnitatem  teriae  per  principp*  illius 
resni  inspiciaa,  et  considerec,  et  tern  illius  ec- 
clesiae  quam  principnm  et  populi  volnntattm 
diligenter  ii  quiras,  et  ab  eis  consiliutn  t-i.-ut 
decet,  accipia*.'' 

f'Q'io  facto,  si  et  necessitatem  teriae  videria 
imminere  et  eccleciae  coni-ilium  fuerit,  ipsi  etiam 
ten 33  principes  tuae  snblimitatis  auxilium  poa- 
tulaverint,  et  consilium  dederint,  jnxta  posfu- 
lationem  et  consuUum  eorum  poteris  postea  in 
facto  ipso  procedere  et  laudabile  votutn  tuum, 
divino  comitante  praeeidio  adimp'ere." 


116 


THK       POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


Letter  by  warning  Kin«  Louis  to  receive 
the  words  of  Rotrodus,  Bishop  of  Evreux, 
ai  if  they  came  directly  from  the  Vicar  of 
ChrUt,  and  he  eulogizes  in  the  highest 
degree  the  prudence  and  virtue  of  that 
great  Bishop. 

This  Letter  is  dated   from   the   Lateran, 
12  kalend.  Maii,  apparently  1159-t 


The  sources  from  which  the  Letter  of 
Pope  Adrian  IV.  to  King  Louis  VII.  of 
France,  has  been  procured,  renders  that 
most  important  document  thoroughly  genu- 
ine beyond  a  shadow  of  doubt.  People  do 
not  forge  documents  containing  refusals, 
and,  moreover,  the  Letter  itself  is  as  much 
in  keeping  with  the  undeviating  principles 
and  implicit  rectitude  of  Pope  Adrian  IV., 
as  the  spurious  Bull  is  diametrically  an- 
tagonistic thereto. 


Inasmuch  as  some  of  our  readers  might 
resurrect  the  now  obsolete  objection  that 
the  letter  "  H"  in  the  document  which  Pope 
Adrian  IV.,  sent  to  King  Louis  VII.,  of 
France,  referred  to  Spain,  it  is  well  to  anti- 
cipate such  an  objection  by  fortifying  what 
we  have  already  said  upon  this  matter, 
through  the  introduction  of  additional  testi- 
mony which  will  show  plainly  to  every  dis- 
cerning mind  that  by  the  letter  '•IT'the 
Holy  Father  meant  Hibetnia,  Ireland,  and 
not  Hispania,  Spain. 

Before  proceeding  with  our  additional 
proofs,  however,  we  will  state  the  fact  that 
the  first  person  to  assert  that  the  letter 
"  H"  in  Pope  Adrian's  missive  to  King 
Louis  alluded  to  JHispjinia,  Spain,  was  a 
Calvinist,  named  James  Bongars,  born  at 
Orleans,  in  France,  in  the  year  1546,  and 
who  afterwards  became  the  counsellor  and 
steward  of  the  French  King  Henry  IV., 
and  was  also  employed  by  that  prince 
as  his  Ambassador  at  the  Court  of  Ger- 
many. During  his  official  career  he  came 
into  possession  of  a  large  number  of  manu- 
scripts belonging  to  the  Library  of  Saint - 
Benoit-sur-Loire,  which  were  scattered  in 
consequence  of  that  abbey  having  been 

t  Bougara,  Geita  Dei  pir  Franco*,  pag.  1174. 
Andre  Diibchesne,  Berum  francigcarum  Scrip- 
tore*,  Tom.  iv.  pa£.  557.  Dom.  Bouquet.  Re- 
cueil  des  historians,  Tom.  15.  Migne,  Patro- 
logie,  Tom.  188.  Col.  1615. 


pillaged  by  the  Calvinists.  In  addition  to 
these  valuable  documents,  Bongars  also  pro- 
cured by  purchase  a  great  many  important 
manuscripts  which  were  originally  a  portion 
of  the  valuable  collection  stored  in  the  Li- 
brary of  the  Cathedral  of  Strasbourg. 

Bongars  died  at  Paris,  in  the  year  1612, 
the  year  following  the  publication  of  a  work 
known  as  the  Geata  Dei  per  Francos — a  vol- 
ume which  has  become  very  valuable  in  the 
great  question  under  debate. 

The  letter  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  to  King 
Louis  VII.,  of  France,  which  we  have  al- 
ready presented  to  our  readers,  first  ap- 
peared in  the  Geata  Dti  per  Francos,** 
where  it  is  catalogued  as  the  28th.  among 
the  missives  written  to  King  Louis  Vil  , 
by  Kings,  Princes  and  Prelates.  Twenty- 
seven  of  these  letters  were  borrowed  from 
the  valuable  collection  of  manuscripts  in  the 
library  of  President  Petau,  but  Bongars 
does  not  mention  the  source  from  which  he 
procured  the  28th.  letter,  viz  :  the  missive 
sent  by  Adrian  IV.,  to  King  Louis  VII.  It 
is  not  unlikely,  however,  that  all  these  let- 
ters were  originally  the  property  of  the 
Abbey  Saint  Benoit-sui-Loire,  and  it  is  not 
improbable  that  Bongars  had  given  them  all 
— with  the  exception  of  the  Adrian- Louis 
missive — to  President  Petau,  retaining  the 
latter  document  in  his  own  posession  until 
after  the  death  of  the  editor  or  collector  of 
these  letters. 

Thirty  years  later  a  French  bibliophile, 
found  these  valuable  documents  in  the  pos- 
session of  Alexander  Petau,  Senator  or 
Counsellor  of  the  French  Assembly.  They 
appeared  in  the  4th.  tome  of  a  work  entitled 
Rerum  Franciccarum  «Sc*  iptorfs,  published 
in  the  year  1641,  shortly  after  the  death  of 
the  editor. 

The  compiler  tells  us  that  the  manuscript 
of  these  letters  is  ancient,  ft  As  already 
stated,  the  volume  did  not  appear  until 
af  er  the  demise  of  Andrew  Duschene,  but 
this  learned  man  doubtless  was  aware  of  the 
fact  that  Bongars  had  previously  published 
these  letters. 

The  Abbey   of  St    Victor,    in  Paris,  pos- 

•*P.  1174,  Hanovias  1611. 

tfEputorarum  volumen,  qias  Pontiftces  Ro- 
uiitni,  etc..  ad  Ludovicum  VII.  Scripi-erunt,  ex 
veteri  codice  MSS.  viri  clar.  Alexandri  Petavii 
Senatoris  Pariaiensis  nunc  primum  editum  1041. 


THE      POPE       AND       I  BEL  AND. 


117 


seased  another  manuscript  copy  of  these  val- 
uable letters,  a  fact  borne  out  by  the  tes- 
timony of  the  editor  of  the  Duschene  vol- 
ume, in  these  words  :  "  Whence  it  can 
easily  be  conjectured  that  this  collection 
of  letters  was  made  by  some  Abbot  or 
Canon  of  the  Monastery  of  Saint  Victor,  in 
Paris."+:t 

The  manuscripts  owned  by  President 
Petau  were  considered  so  extremely  valuable 
that  they  were  ultimately  purchased  for 
their  weight  in  gold  by  Queen  Christina  of 
Sweden,  who  presented  them  to  the  Vati- 
can Library,  and  thus  greatly  enriched  that 
vast  storehouse  of  historical  lore,  and  also 
saved  to  the  world  valuable  testimony  on 
the  present  historical  question. 

Bongars  was  the  first  to  interpret  the  ini- 
tial "  H"  in  the  letter  of  Pope  Adrian  IV. 
to  King  Louis  VII.,  as  meaning  Hispania, 
Spain.  And,  when  it  is  taken  into  considera- 
tion that  this  man  was  a  Calvinist  at  a  time 
when  that  persecuting  sect  was  most  bitterly 
waging  a  blood-thirsty  persecution  against 
the  Church,  it  is  easy  to  surmize  that  such 
an  arbitrary  decision  was  not  altogether  un- 
designed on  the  part  of  Bongars. 

Like  the  numerous  errors,  calumnies  and 
falsehoods  of  Cambrensis,  this  wrong  inter- 
pretation of  the  letter  "H"  by  Bongars,  has 
led  subsequent  writers  into  erroneous  con- 
clusions, simply  because  they  did  not  stop 
to  consider  the  prejudiced  source  from 
whence  this  opinion  came. 

Right  here  this  important  question  will 
no  doubt  suggest  itself  to  the  minds  of 
many  of  our  readers  :  •'  Did  the  Calvinist 
Bongars  have  any  peculiar  sectarian  interest 
in  keeping  the  world  in  ignorance  of  the 
fact  that  Pope  Adrian  IV.,— so  far  from 
having  authorized  the  iniquitous  invasion  of 
Ireland— had,  on  the  contrary,  formally  dis- 
suaded the  Kings  of  both  England  and 
France  from  any  such  scheme,  and  openly 
refused  his  consent  to  any  such  expedition  ?" 

One  thing  is  certain,  that  the  publication 
of  Pope  Adrian's  letter  to  the  French  King, 
if  published  in  the  year  1611,  and  made 
known  to  the  English-speaking  world,  would 

tJFuit  et  simile  olim  exemplar  in  Bibliotheca 
Canonicorum  Regularium  Sancti  Victoiis,  Paris. 
—Not  :  11,22.  Kerum  Franciccarum  Tom.  IV  , 
pag.  557. 


have  subsequently  exercised  a  wonderful 
influence  in  thwarting  the  pretensions  of 
England  in  proclaiming  its  supremacy  over 
Ireland  by  authority  of  any  Bull  or  (.-ther 
Papal  document. 

Another  question  which  naturally  sug- 
gests itself  in  this  connection  is  this  :  Could 
it  be  possible  for  a  Calvinist  to  so  denude 
himself  of  his  determined  and  diabolical 
hatred  of  both  Popes  and  Popery,  as— by 
any  act  of  his — to  let  a  single  beam  of  the 
light  of  truth  fall  upon  the  falsely -sullied 
character  of  a  Pope  whose  memory,  for  so 
many  centuries,  had  been  clouded  by  a  cal- 
umnious charge  coated  with  the  blackest 
odium  ?  The  answer  to  this  question  will 
suggest  itself  to  every  mind  enlightened  by 
the  knowledge  of  the  black-hearted  bigotry 
which  has  constantly  been  demonstrated  by 
Calvinists  against  the  Catholic  Church. 


Now  let  us  return  to  the  consideration  of 
the  letter  "  H1'  in  Pope  Adrian's  letter,  so 
as  to  adduce  a  few  more  proofs  in  substan- 
tiation of  what  we  have  already  asserted 
i.  e.  that  the  letter  of  Pope  Adrian  to  Louis 
VI[.,  could  not  possibly  have  referred  to 
Spain,  and  that  it  necessarily  alluded  to  Ire- 
land alone. 

Aside  from  all  other  reasons  why  "  H" 
could  not  mean  Hispania,  it  would  appear 
perfectly  ridiculous  for  the  King  of  France 
to  ask  permission  of  the  Pope  to  help  the 
King  of  Castile,  who  was  his  own  father-in- 
law.  Again,  if  Spain  was  the  objective  point 
against  which  the  English  and  French  mon- 
archs  desired  to  move  in  martial  array,  why 
select  the  Englishman,  Rotrodus,  Bishop  of 
Warwick,  to  undertake  negotiations  therefor 
with  the  Holy  Father  ? 

And  again,  let  us  look  at  the  text  of  the 
Adrian  letter  and  ask  any  impartial  reader 
it  by  any  remote  possibility  even,  these 
words  could  apply  to  Moorish  Spain  : 

"The  Clergy,  the  Princes  and  the  people  must 
be  consulted,  and  their  wishes  with  respect  to 
intervention  must  be  followed." 

It  is  entirely  unnecessary  to  dilate  on 
this  point,  as  every  reader  of  history  knows 
that  Pope  Adrian  could  never  intend  such 
an  allusion  to  refer  to  a  country  many  of 
whose  inhabitants  were  at  that  period  Mos- 


118 


THK      1'Ol'E      AND      IUELAND. 


leiu  enemies  of  the  Church,  and  who  were 
consequently  at  direct  enmity  with  the 
Spanish  Clergy  and  the  Christian  rulers  of  a 
portion  of  Spain.  In  order,  however,  to 
meet  any  captious  critic  who  may  adopt  the 
Culvinistic  interpretation  of  the  letter  "H" 
as  inspired  by  Bongars,  let  us  suppose  that 
Pope  Adrian's  letter  had  no  reference  — 
either  remote  or  immediate  -to  Ireland. 
Would  such  an  admission,  even  if  true,  mili- 
ta  e  against  our  defence  of  Pope  Adrian 
IV.  ]  By  no  means !  The  sterling  senti- 
ments of  that  grand  Pontiff — no  matter  what 
country  they  allude  to — stand  as  a  trium- 
phant refutation  of  the  moss-covered  cal- 
umny which  has  clouded  his  memory  during 
(he  past  seven  centuries. 

Pope  Adrian's  letter  expresses  the  Chris- 
tian grandeur  and  integrity  of  his  soul  ;  his 
sublime  nobility  of  character,  and  his  un- 
flinching integrity  in  defending  the  rights  of 
an  inoffensive  people  about  to  be  assailed  in 
their  own  land  ! 

With  pride  then,  we  ask  :  Could  a  Pope 
who  gave  such  divine,  such  heaven-born  in- 
structions as  are  found  in  Pope  Adrian's 
letter  to  King  Louis,  ever  be  capable  of 
concocting  the  vile,  unchristian  document 
which  the  hireling  Cambrensis  ushered  into 
the  world  as  King  Henry's  title  to  a  land 
which  has  ever  since  been  crucified  on  the 
Calvary  of  British  injustice  ? 

These  points  add  still  another  link  to  the 
chain  of  cumulative  evidence  which  clearly 
proves  that  neither  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  nor 
Alexander  III.,  ever  issued  the  diabolical 
documents  attributed  to  them,  and  which, 
by  the  way,  neither  Bongars  nor  Duschene 
met  with  among  all  the  12th  century  manu- 
scripts they  investigated. 


Now  let  us  call  the  particular  attention 
of  the  reader  to  some  very  interesting 
points  of  peculiar  similarity  between  the 
genuine  Letter  and  the  spurious  Bull,  so  as 
to  convince  every  candid  reader  that  King 
Henry  II.  of  England  forged  the  Bull  by 
which  he  is  said  to  have  acquired  Ire- 
land through  Pope  Adrian  IV. 

In  the  genuine  Letter  of  Pope  Adrian 
IV.  it  is  said  that  King  Louis  VII.  of 
France  had  gathered  an  army  and  provided 
munitions  of  war  and  all  other  things 


necessary  for  making  both  a  journey  by 
land  as  well  as  a  voyage  by  sea  :  "  Studes 
assidue  .  .  .  exercitum,  et  qua;  sunt  iten- 
eri  necessaria  congregare."  It  is  scarcely 
necessary  to  say  that  a  military  expedition 
on  land  required  nothing  more  than  a 
well- equipped  army,  and  thus  we  discern 
that  the  expedition  regarding  which  Louis 
VII.  of  France,  and  Henry  II.  of  England, 
sent  a  joint  letter  to  the  Pope,  consulting 
him  regarding  the  project,  alluded  to  Ire- 
land, and  not  to  Spain,  as  some  writers 
erroneously  assert. 

The  true  Letter  reads  thus:  ''Jit  //. 
properare  intendis,"  and  in  the  Apocryphal 
Bull :  Significastj,  nobis,  te  HibernitK  in- 
sulam  ....  vette  intrare  ....  Gratum 
habemus  ut  .  .  .  .  insulam.  illam  ingredi- 
aris."  These  expressions  seem  to  indicate 
that  there  is  question  of  penetrating  into 
the  interior  of  Ireland,  and,  moreover,  they 
plainly  indicate  that  the  King  of  England 
occupied  some  points  on  the  Irish  sea  coast, 
while  the  fact  is  that  it  was  about  ten  years 
after  the  death  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.  that 
the  Norman  invaders  and  King  Henry  took 
possession  of  Waterford  and  Dublin.  This 
latter  fact,  alone,  clearly  shows  the  utter 
impossibility  of  the  bogus  Bull  ever  having 
emanated  from  Pope  Adrian,  ever  having 
being  sent  to  King  Henry  from  Rome  or 
from  any  other  place  in  Europe  whose  soil 
was  ever  pressed  by  the  foot-prints  of  a 
successor  of  St.  Peter  ! 

The  forgers  who  fabricated  the  fraudulent 
Bull  were  evidently  ignorant  of  the  very 
important  fact  that  all  Bulls  of  concession 
of  investiture  were  Consistorial  acts  which 
required  the  signatures  of  the  Cardinals. 
But  inasmuch  as  many  members  of  the 
College  of  Cardinals  who  flourished  during 
the  pontificate  of  Pope  Adrian  were  still 
alive  when  the  bogus  Bull  was  under  the 
stylus  of  some  British  caligrapher,  it  would 
never  do  to  sign  the  names  of  any  Cardinals 
to  such  a  fraudulent  document,  hence  the 
name  of  Adrian  IV.  was  made  to  do  duty 
solitary  and  alone,  and  the  owner  of  that 
name  having  died  about  thirty  years  previ- 
ously, the  forger  had  little  to  fear  that 
Pope  Adrian  IV.  would  discover  the  fraud ! 


Finally,  the  forgery  of  both  the   so-called 


THE      POl'E      AND      IltELAND. 


119 


Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls  is  so  palpable 
it  is  actually  amazing  that  the  trans- 
parent fraud  had  not  long  ages  ago  aroused 
the  suspicions  of  historians  who  could  have 
penetrated  into  the  vitals  of  the  vicious 
documents  and  dissected  the  diabolical  in- 
ventions for  the  enlightenment  of  the  whole 
world. 

That  such  a  discovery  was  not  made 
several  centuries  ago,  can  be  accounted  for 
only  on  the  hypothesis  that  no  historical 
writer  took  the  time  or  trouble  to  compare 
the  documents  before  him,  to  analyze  their 
language,  or  to  subject  the  dates,  facts  and 
circumstances  set  forth  to  that  scrutiny 
which  has  resulted  in  such  a  triumph  for 
truth  and  justice,  and  gained  such  a  glori- 
ous victory  for  the  Popes  so  long  maligned 
by  ignorant  and  designing  men,  and  also 
for  that  Church  which  has  been  the  recipi- 
ent of  the  calumny  of  even  some  of  her 
own  children,  but  of  whom  she  can  with 
great  truth  say  :  "Father,  forgive  them, 
for  they  know  not  what  they  do." 


Among  the  multitude  of  facts  which  we 
have  brought  forward  to  prove  the  spurious 
character  of  the  forged  Papal  documents 


under  consideration,  there  is  still  another 
circumstance  which  will  add  strength  to  all 
that  has  already  been  said  on  this  subject, 
and  that  is  the  instinct  (which  to  us  appears 
to  have  been  super- human),  by  which  every 
Pope  prudently  refrained  from  making  any 
direct  official  reference  to  the  fraudulent 
document  falsely  attributed  to  Pope  Adrian 
IV.  even  upon  important  occasions  when 
it  might  seem  judicious  to  allude  to  it 
casually  or  to  mention  it  directly. 

This  fact  comes  forcibly  before  us  in  the 
action  of  the  Cardinals  who  officiated  at 
Avranches,  when  King  Henry  swore  that 
he  had  no  intention  to  be  accessory  to  the 
murder  of  St.  Thomas  A'Becket,  as  well  as 
in  the  case  of  such  Pontiffs  as  Innocent 
II I.,  John  XXII.,  Paul  IV.,  and  St.  Pius 
V.,  in  his  Bull  against  Elizabeth  ;  Gregory 
XIII.  and  Clement  VIII.,  all  of  whom  had 
frequent  occasion  to  mention  both  the 
Adrian  and  the  Alexander  "Bulls,"  vhen 
treating  of  subject  matters  relating  to  Ire- 
land. But  no  doubt  these  Pontiffs  ha>  I  no 
faith  in  the  forged  diplomas,  and  thus  they 
ignored  them  altogether  as  entirely-  un- 
worthy of  their  notice. 


120 


THE       POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


CHAPTER      XX. 

The  Papal  Court  of  the  Fourteenth  Century  had  no  Knowledge  Concerning  the  Bogus 
Adrian  Bull.— The  Letter  Sent  by  King  Edward  of  England  to  Pope  John  XXII. 
Reply  of  that  Pontiff.— Letter  from  O'Neil,  King  of  Ulster,  to  Pope  John  XXII. 
Comments  thereon  Proving  that  the  Spurious  Adrian  Bull  never  Originated  in 
Home,  nor  was  its  Genuine  Character  ever  admitted  by  the  Irish  People. 


In  the  year  1310,  a  short  time  after  the 
election  of  Pope  John  XXII.,  King  Ed- 
ward of  England  sent  three  plenipotenti- 
aries to  Rome  in  order  to  place  in  the 
hands  of  the  Holy  Father  the  tribute  of 
one  thousand  pounds  sterling  promised  by 
John  Lackland,  and  to  offer  the  excuses 
of  his  Majesty  for  the  tardiness  of  payment, 
there  being  then  about  twenty-four  annui- 
ties in  arrears.  The  annalist  who  succeeded 
Baronius  publishes  the  King's  Letter  in 
which  Edward  makes  no  mention  of  any 
portion  of  the  same  as  coming  from  Ireland. 

If  Pope  John  XXII.  had  any  knowledge 
of  the  existence  of  the  Adrian  and  Alex- 
ander Bulls,  he  must  have  entertained  a 
very  peculiar  idea  of  King  Edward's  hon- 
esty when  that  monarch  informed  him  that 
there  were  twenty  four  years  indebtedness 
of  Peter  Pence  due  from  a  nation  that  had 
first  promised  to  pay  it  in  1156  under  the 
supposed  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian  !  From  1156 
to  1316  is  one  hundred  and  sixty  years, 
and  Pope  John  would  certainly  have  re- 
minded King  Edward  of  this  fact  in  their 
financial  agreement,  if  such  a  Bull  could 
be  discovered  anywhere  in  the  Papal  ar- 
chive* ! 


Pope  John  XXII.  was  one  of  those  Pon- 
tiffs who  took  deep  interest  in  all  matters 
that  concerned  the  welfare  of  the  Holy 
See,  and  no  doubt  he  gave  this  question  of 
the  Adrian  Bull  a  rigid  investigation.  Be- 
sides, his  Holiness  was  assisted  in  such 
secular  concerns  by  a  staff  of  saintly,  able 
and  erudite  men — such  as  the  eminent 
Dominican  Bernard  Guido  and  others.  Yet, 
after  all  the  scrutiny  devoted  to  the  search 
for  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls,  by 
these  archivists  and  officers  of  the  Vatican, 
not  a  solitary  trace  of  either  of  these  docu- 
ments coidd  be  dif covered  ! 

The  annals  of  the  Church  kept  in  Rome 


failed  to  reveal  a  particle  of  evidence  that 
would  throw  any  light  upon  the  two  Eng- 
lish documents.  The  Cardinals  had  never 
heard  of  them,  common  rumor  had  never 
mentioned  them  and  thus  the  bogus  Bulls 
of  both  Adrian  and  Alexander  were  aa 
unknown  to  the  Pope  of  Rome  in  the  year 
1316,  as  any  other  document  could  be  that 
nerer  had  a  legitimate  existence  ! 

The  Pope  wrote  a  reply  to  King  Edward, 
in  answer  to  the  epistle  which  he  sent  by 
his  equerries,  and  therein  he  tells  Edward 
that  John  Lackland  delivered  up  his  king- 
dom, with  its  rights  and  dependencies,  to 
the  Pope  of  Rome  ;  that  the  English  King 
promised- for  himself  and  his  successors  — 
that  he  and  they  would  render  proper  hom- 
age, and  pay  the  annual  tribute,  under  pain 
of  forfeiture.  "All  this,"  says  the  Pope, 
"is  known  both  by  rumor  and  from  the 
Chronicles.* 

It  follows,  therefore,  in  the  most  logical 
manner,  that  neither  the  officials  around 
the  Pontifical  court,  nor  Pope  John  himself, 
had  ever  heard  of  the  existence  of  these 
bogus  Bulls. 

Let  us  suppose,  however,  that  the  annals 
of  Giraldus  Cambrenais,  Raoul  de  Diceto, 
Mathew  Paris,  Roger  of  Wendover,  and  all 
the  other  Englishmen  who  who  had  com- 
piled Chronicles  for  more  than  a  century 
previous,  were  entirely  unknown  in  Rome, 
would  the  Pope  have  rested  satisfied? 
Certainly  not.  His  Holiness  would  have  ap- 
plied to  the  text  of  the  official  Regesta,  then 
the  Bullarium  would  have  been  tried,  and 
when  that  failed,  the  Vicar  of  Christ  would 
have  referred  to  public  rumor  (fama  ncti- 
ficat)  in  order  to  ascertain  some  information 
concerning  the  existence  of  such  ecclesias- 
tical compacts  with  two  English  Kings. 

So  certain  is  it  that  the  Pontifical  Court 

*  "  Prout  haec  omniafama  notijicat,  et  chroni- 
carum  twpectio  manifestat." 


THE       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


121 


had  no  knowledge  of  the  Adrian  and  Alex- 
ander Bulls,  that  the  Irish  people,  when  they 
felt  themselves  constrained  to  send  a  long 
letter  of  complaint  to  Pope  John  XXII., 
enclosed  a  copy  of  the  spurious  Adrian  Bull 
to  the  Holy  Father  and  to  the  Cardinal 
Legates. 

In  his  reply  to  the  complaint  of  the  Irish 
petitioners,  Pope  John  spoke  precisely  as 
any  person  would  who  harbored  grave  doubts 
as  to  the  genuineness  of  the  documents 
aent  to  him 

In  reference  to  the  bogus  Adrian  Bull 
hia  Holiness  wrote  :  "  Quas  (litteras)  prae- 
dictus  Adrianus  Praedecessor  noster  eidem 
ivgi  Angliae  de  terra  Hiberniae  Concessisse 
dicitur,"  the  translation  of  which  is  :  Which 
letter  the  aforesaid  Adrian,  our  predecessor, 
is  a  lid  t->  h'ive  conceded  to  the  same  Henry 
King  of  England,  in  reference  to  the  coun- 
try of  Ireland." 

This  is  plain  and  positive  proof  that  the 
tirsc  intimation  Pope  John  XXII.  ever  had 
that  such  a  document  as  Pope  Adrian's 
Bull  to  King  Henry  of  England  had  any 
existence,  was  when  he  received  it  from  the 
people  of  Ireland  who  used  it  as  an  argu- 
menttim  ad  hominem  against  the  cruelties 
and  injustice  which  the  King  of.  England  s 
minions  in  Ireland  were  then  subjecting 
them  to. 

The  chiefs  and   the   Irish   people   of  the 
Province  of  Ulster,  being  no  longer  able  or 
willing    to    undergo    the  robbery,    rapine, 
cruelty   and   injustice  heaped   upon    them 
by  their  British  tyrants,  broke  out  in  re- 
bellion and   called  to   their  assistance  Ed- 
ward Bruce,  brother  of  the  celebrated  hero 
Robert  Bruce,  King  of  Scotland.     In  order 
that  their   rebellion   might  be  justified   in 
the  estimation  of  the  then  reigning  Pontiff 
and  the  Catholic  princes  of  the  whole  world, 
the  Irish  sent  couriers  to  the  two  Cardinal 
Legates,  Joscelin  and   Fieschi,  then   living 
in  Scotland,    enclosing  a  copy   of   the   so- 
called  Adrian  Bull  for  the  purpose  of  point- 
ing out  the  fact  that  its  conditions   having 
been  ignored   by   the    English   monarchs  — 
the  whole  document  was  void  in  consequence 
of  such  violations. 


When    Pope   John   XXII.    received   the 


Letter  of  complaint  from  the  Irish  people, 
he  caused  a  Brief  to  be  addressed  to  King 
Edward,  fo  which  the  following  is  a  correct 
translation,  there  being  in  existence  several 
fahe  translations  which  were  purposely 
made  through  English  influence,  in  order  to 
make  it  appear  that  the  Pope  sent  to  the 
King  of  England  a  transcript  of  the  Adrian 
Bull  as  he  found  it  in  the  Vatican  archives; 

JOHN,  Bishop,  Servant  of  the  Servants  of 
God,  to  Edward,  Illustrious  King  of 
England,  Health  and  Apostolic  Bene- 
diction. 

The  earnest  exhortations  which  We  address  to 
you,  Dearly  Beloved  Son,  in  order  to  move  you 
to  do  what  is  pleasing  to  the  truly  just  Judge, 
to  preserve  peace  in  the  countries  and  among  the 
subjects  of  your  kingdom ;  to  provide  for  all 
that  can  contribute  to  your  renown  and  glory, 
emanate  from  a  paternal  heart  which  desires  the 
exaltation  of  your  Excellency.  You  ought  then 
to  receive  them  with  affection,  and  show  your- 
self prompt  and  docile  in  fulfilling  them. 

We  have  received  a  Letter  which  the  Rulers 
and  people  of  Ireland  sent  some  time  ago  to  our 
Dear  Sons  Joscelin,  Cardinal  Priest  of  the 
titles  of  SS.  Peter  and  Marcellinns,  and  Luke 
Fieschi,  Cardinal  Deacon,  of  the  title  of  St. 
Mary  Inviolata,  Nuncios  of  the  Apostolic  See. 
This  Letter  these  same  Cardinals  have  trans- 
mitted enclosed  in  their  own  Letter  to  Us. 

In  these  Letters  from  the  Irish,  among  other 
things,  we   have  read  that  Pope    Adrian,   our 
predecessor  of  happy  memory,  having,  under  a 
certain  manner  and  form  expressed  in  the  Apos- 
tolic Letters  drawn  up  for  that    purpose,    con- 
ceded the  domain  of  Ireland   to  your  ancestor 
King  Henry  II.   of  illustrious  memory.     That 
Prince  and  his  successors  the  king*   of   England 
until  this  day,  far  from  observing    the   aforesaid 
manner  and  form,  have,  on  the  contrary,  trans- 
gressed against  all  rule,  and  by  cruel  vexations, 
unheard  of  oppressions,  unsupportable  servitude 
and  most,  inhuman  tyranny,   crushed   the   Irish 
in  a  manner  so  much  the  more  unfortunate  and 
unsupportable  as  that  tyranny   has    lasted    so 
long,  and  no  one  until  this  day  has  repaired  the 
wrongs  done,  nor  put  a   stop   to  the  disorders. 
No  one   has  had  compassion  on  their  misfor- 
tunes, although  they  have  many  times  addressed 
their  complaints  to  you,   and  although  the  cry 
of  the  oppressed  had  reached  your  ears.     These 
are  the  reasons  why,  not  being  any  longer  able 
to  support  their  condition,  they  have  been  con- 
strained   to    withdraw  themselves    from    your 
house  and  to  call  in  another  prince  to  govern 
them. 

If  these  complaints  are  well  founded,  dearly 
beloved  Son,  they  affect  us  so  much  the  more 
intensely,  as  we  are  most  anxious  that  all  your 


122 


THE      POPK      AND      IRELAND. 


affairs  may  tarn  out  well  and  prosperously  for 
you.  You  should  exert  all  your  care  to  remedy 
the  evils,  and  act  with  promptness  in  striving  to 
please  your  Creator  in  this  matter.  Beware  of 
doing  anything  that  may  provoke  God  Himself 
— the  Lord  of  vengeance— againit  yon.  Him 
who  does  not  despise  even  one  of  the  sighs  of 
those  who  are  unjustly  treated,  and  Who,  as  a 
punishment  for  injustices,  rejected  His  chosen 
people,  and  transfened  from  them  His  kingdom 
—  as  we  learn  from  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

At  a  period  so  disturbed  as  this  is.  We  desire 
most  earnestly  also  that  you  will  adopt  the 
measures  that  will  bring  back  to  yourself  the 
affection  and  submission  of  the  people  complain- 
ing, and  that  you  avoid  everything  that  can 
detach  them  from  your  service. 

As  it  is  to  your  highest  interest  to  arrest  new 
charges,  and  to  remedy  at  once  the  trouble 
which  may  increase  and  become  irremediable, 
We  seriously  solicit  your  Royal  Excellency,  and 
prudently  counsel  you  to  reflect  wisely  and  to 
act  promptly,  through  ways  and  means  that  are 
suitable,  in  order  that  you  may  pat  a  stop  to  the 
complaints,  and  that  you  may  effect  reforms 
which  will  arrest  movements  that  are  so  danger- 
ous. You  can  in  this  way  please  Him  by  whom 
yon  rule,  and  by  fulfilling  faithfully  your  duty 
yon  will  put  an  end  to  all  complaints. 

Then  there  will  be  room  for  hoping  that  the 
Irish,  being  inspired  with  better  counsels,  will 
submit  to  your  authority,  or  even,  if  they  wish 
to  persist  in  the  rebellion  inaugurated  (which 
may  God  foibid)  they  will  transform  their 
cause  into  a  flagrant  ID  justice,  and  you  wil 
stand  excused  before  God  and  man. 

In  crder  that  you  may  thoroughly  understand 
the  griefs  and  complaints  upon  which  the  Irish 
lay  stress,  we  enclose  iu  the  present  Letter,  the 
oue  which  they  had  transmitted  through  the 
undersigned  Cardinals  to  Us,  and  We  join  with 
it  the  one  which,  it  it  said,  Our  predecessor 
Adrian  granted  to  said  Henry,  King  of  Eng- 
land, in  regard  to  the  land  of  Ireland. 

Given  in  the  Srd  Kalends  of  July— 29th  of 
June. 

Tt  is  scarcely  necessary  to  call  particular 
attention  to  the  severity  with  which  Pope 
John  XXII.  lashes  the  oppressions  con- 
demned by  the  divine  law  and  conscience, 
nor  to  point  out  in  any  extended  remarks 
how  that  Pontiff  informs  the  King  that  the 
cause  of  the  Irish  will  be  entirely  just  if  he 
does  not  speedily  put  an  end  to  the  iniqui- 
ties perpetrated  against  the  Irish  people 
for  so  long  a  period. 

This  language  is  not  such  as  would  be 
used  by  Pope  John  XXII.,  if  he  had  the 


slightest  notion  that  his  predecessor  Adrian 
IV.  had  donated  Ireland  to  an  English 
King.  Again  :  If  Pope  Innocent  III.  had 
accepted  the  suzerainty  of  Ireland  which 
King  John  offered  to  him  at  the  same  time 
that  he  offered  England,  would  Pope  John 
XXII.  have  omitted  all  mention  of  such 
an  important  diplomatic  transaction  ?  Would 
he  have  confined  his  counsel  to  the  King 
within  the  limits  of  "justice  and  con- 
science" ?  Would  he  not  rather  have 
charged  his  Legates  to  have  the  case  of 
Ireland's  complaint  against  the  English 
King  brought  before  them,  who  would  then 
give  judgment  in  the  case  between  the 
Papal  feudatory  King  and  his  Irish  vassals 
who  would  also  have  become  the  vassals  of 
the  Church  of  Rome  ?  Moreover,  he  would 
have  written  direct  to  the  representatives 
of  the  Irish  people,  in  order  to  assure  them 
of  redress  for  their  grievances,  and  to  put 
an  end  to  the  wrongs  that  were  perpetrated 
in  their  land.  As  Pope  John  XXII.  did 
not  act  thus,  we  claim  his  failure  to  cany 
out  such  a  line  of  duty,  as  another  proof 
against  the  authenticity  of  the  so-called 
Adrian  Bull. 

We  have  said  that  false,  trans' 'at ions 
have  been  made  of  the  letter  of  Pope  John 
XXII.,  by  biased  British  writers,  and  here 
is  a  britf  explanation  of  the  crime  thus 
committed.  According  to  the  continuator 
of  Baronius,  who  collated  the  original 
Regesta,  Pope  John  XXII.  expressed  him- 
self doubtingly  on  the  subject  of  the  so- 
called  Adrian  Bull,  when  he  used  the  words 
"  concessisse  dicitur,"  but  the  British  copy- 
ists, with  the  desire  to  falsify  the  Pope's 
expression  of  doubt,  have  made  the  passage 
read  thus:  " Adrianus  Henrico  regi  Au- 
gliae  de  terra  Ibernise  concessit."  Accord- 
ing to  that  false  rendering,  the  Pontiff 
would  have  admitted  without  dispute  the 
authenticity  of  the  Bull  of  Adrian,  and 
thus  falsehood  and  fraud  would  have  tri- 
umphed over  truth  and  justice. 

So  cleverly  was  Uu's  mistranslation  effect- 
ed that  some  Irish  writers  themselves,  not 
suspecting  such  sinful  scheming  on  the  part 
of  prejudiced  English  historians,  have,  in 
many  cases,  copied  the  English  "concessit." 
Thus,  Peter  Lombard,  Archbiahop  of  AT- 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


123 


ina^h,  representing  the  Irish  people  at 
Rome  during  the  Pontificate  of  Pope  Clem- 
ent VIII.,  followed  the  interpolated  text 
in  his  work,  "  Annals  of  Ireland.''* 

Abbe  MacGeoghegan,  who  published  his 
history  at  Paris  in  1758,  copied  from  Lom- 
bard, but  ho  would  have  discovered  the 
fraud  had  he  consulted  "  Baronius'  Annals," 
which  gave  the  true  text  in  these  words  : 

"  Ut  autem  de  praedictis  gravaminibus  et 
querelis  quibus  praedicti  innituntur  Ibernici, 
tuis  sensihus  innotescat  ad  plenum  prce- 
dictas  litteras  missas  Cardinalibus  antedic- 
tis,  turn  formam  litterarum  quas  praedictus 
Adrianus  praedecessor  noster  eidem  Henrico 
Regi  A"  glue  de  terra  Hibernae  concessisse 
didt'ir,  tuae  magnitudini  mittimus  prae- 
sentibus  interclusas.''t 

The  remarkable  circumspection  of  Pope 
John  XXII.,  in  quietly  repudiating  the 
Bull  manufactured  by  King  Henry  II.  in 
Pope  Adrian's  name,  is  increased  several 
degrees  when  it  is  known  that  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  Irish  people  who  sent  the 
letter  of  complaint  against  King  Edward  to 
that  Pontiff,  seemed  to  imagine  that  the 
Adrian  forgery  was  a  genuine  Papal  docu- 
ment which,  they  alleged,  was  obtained  by 
fraud.  $ 

On  the  other  hand  it  is  well  known  to  all 
persons  familiar  with  Irish  history,  that  the 
vast  majority  of  the  people  of  Ireland, 
constantly  and  persistently  rejected  the 
so  called  "  Bull"  falsely  attributed  to  Pope 
Adrian  as  spurious,  false  and  apocryphal. 
This  fact  is  susceptible  of  proof  in  many 
vays,  but  we  will  give  a  single  instance 


*  Page  260,  Louvain  edition,  1632. 

tAnnal.  Baron.  Ami.  1317,  N.  43.  [Judge 
Maguire,  in  his  bad  book,  asks  this  question  : 
"  Where  did  Pope  John  XXII.,  get  the  copy  of 
Adrian's  Bull  which  he  sent  to  the  King  of  Eng- 
1  uicl,  if  the  Bull  itself  was  not  in  Rome  ?"  Thia 
(('isation  is  answered  above.  The  Ulster  Irish 
seat  a  copy  of  the  false  Bull  to  that  Pope,  and 
John  XXII.  transmitted  the  same  copy  to  the 
English  King,  as  he  had  neither  use  for  it  nor 
faith  ir.  its  authenticity.] 

J  Vide  MacGeoghegan  Hiat.  Ireland,  p  33. 


which  will  serve  to  furnish   sufficient  evi- 
dence to  justify  our  assertion. 

The  Library  Barberini,  of  Rome,  con- 
tains a  fourteenth  century  manuscript  com- 
prising numerous  original  documents  relat- 
ing to  the  Pontificate  of  Pope  John  XXII., 
and  embracing  events  which  occurred  during 
the  period  of  which  we  are  at  present 
treating.  Among  the  manuscripts  is  a  let- 
ter from  the  Royal  Council  of  Dublin, 
accusing  the  Irish  of  various  misdemeanors 
displeasing  to  their  English  appointed  rulers, 
and  among  the  most  heinous  crimes  charged 
against  them  is  their  treasonable  and  un- 
pardonable custom  of  perpetually  declaring 
that  King  Henry  II.  of  England,  and  his 
successors,  employed  fraud  and  spurious 
Papal  Bulls  in  order  to  support  their  pre- 
tended dominion  over  Ireland.  § 

Writers  who  desire  to  prejudice  the 
reading  public  against  the  Popes,  and  who 
have  some  particular  reason  for  spreading 
falsehood  so  as  to  divorce  the  Ir.sh  Catholic 
people  from  their  allegiance  to  the  Vicar 
of  Christ,  falsely  assert  that  the  document 
which  we  have  laid  before  our  readers 
represented  the  sentiments  of  the  Irish- 
people,  whereas  the  letter  in  question  was 
sent  by  O'Neill,  King  of  Ulster,  who  took 
to  himself  the  title  of  heirahip  of  all  Ire- 
land, but  such  a  very  violent  presumption 
by  no  means  proves  that  the  admissions 
made  in  that  letter  concerning  the  so- 
called  Adrian  "Bull"  should  be  set  down 
as  the  unanimous  opinion  of  the  whole  peo- 
ple of  Ireland,  the  great  majority  of  whom 
had  neither  hand,  act  nor  part  in  concocting 
the  O'Neill  letter  to  Pope  John  XXII., 
nor  did  they  place  any  reliance  whatever 
upon  the  British  made  "Bulls"  under 
which  King  Henry  claimed  authority  to 
unjustly  invade,  rob  and  ruin  both  the  tem- 
poral and  the  spiritual  rights  of  the  Irish 
people. 

§  "  Asserrentes  etiam  Domiuum  regem  Au- 
gliae  ex  falsa  suggeatione  et  ex  falsia  Bullis  ter- 
rain Hibtrniae  impetrasse,  ac  communiter  hot 
tenentes." 


124 


THK       I'OI'K       AND       IRELAND. 


CHAPTER     XXI. 

The  Erection  of  Ireland  into  a  Kingdom  by  Pope  Paul  IV.  —  How  English  Fraud 
Accomplished  that  Object.— Comments  on  Certain  Expressions  in  the  Letter 
of  Pope  John  XXII.— Rome's  Equal  and  Exact  Justice  Exemplified.— Eng- 
land's Vicious  Methods  Illustrated. 


Up  to  the  year  1555,  Ireland  was  known 
in  all  public  acts  and  official  documents  as 
"The  Land  of  Ireland."  Anterior  to  that 
date  the  word  "Kingdom,"  never  meant 
Ireland,  except  in  the  bogus.  Bull  attribu- 
ted to  Pope  Adrian,  when  the  forger  forgot 
this  fact  and  inscribed  the  wrong  word  in 
that  spurious  document. 

In  all  official  mention  of  the  Kings  of 
England,  from  the  time  of  the  invasion, 
these  monarchs  were  known  as  Lords  of 
Ireland,  nothing  more.  "  Land  of  Ireland" 
was  the  appellation  used  in  all  the  Bulls, 
Rescripts  and  Encyclicals  from  Rome.  Of 
this  fact  we  have  sufficient  proof  in  the 
genuine  Letter  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.  to  King 
Louis  VII.  of  France,  wherein  that  Pontiff 
invariably  makes  use  of  the  same  term  to 
designate  the  country  which  the  Kings  of 
England  and  France  designed  to  invade. 

King  John  offered  to  surrender  to  Pope 
Innocent  III.  the  "kingdom  of  Ireland," 
but  the  Sovereign  Pontiff  was  sufficiently 
wise  to  avoid  using  the  word  "  kingdom"  in 
relation  to  Ireland,  because  he  knew  the 
country  was  not  known  under  such  an  ap- 
pellation. King  Henry  VIII. ,  in  writing 
to  Pope  Leo  X.,  did  not  style  himself 
"  King,"  but  merely  "Lord  of  Ireland," 
as  he  also  well  knew  that  Ireland  was  not 
styled  a  kingdom. 

The  Protestant  Parliament  which  was 
held  in  Dublin,  erected  Ireland  into  a  king- 
dom, and  Edward  VI.  took  for  himself  the 
pompous  title  of  "  King  of  England,  France 
and  Ireland."  This  example  was  followed 
by  Queen  Mary,  who  succeeded  her  brother 
Edward  in  1553.  When  she  married  Philip 
of  Spain,  son  of  Charles  V.,  the  proclama- 
tions and  ordinances  of  the  royal  titles 
mentioned,  among  others,  that  of  "  King 
and  Queen  of  Ireland,"  On  this  historical 
poiiit  Dr.  Lingard  says : 


"  Cardinal  Pule  understood  that  difficulties 
might  arise  from  the  taking  of  this  title  by  Phil- 
ip and  Mary,  and  for  this  reason  he  asked  tLe 
Sovereign  Pontiff  to  erect  Ireland  into  a  king- 
dom before  the  arrival  of  the  ambassadors  at 
Rome.  But  the  death  of  Juliu«  III.  following 
closely  upon  that  of  Marcellus  II.,  had  prevent- 
ed these  Pontiffs  from  carrying  out  the  Car- 
dinal's suggestion.  The  urgency  of  the  matter 
therefore  suggested  itself  to  Pope  Paul  IV.,  and 
immediately  upon  his  coronation  that  Pontiff 
published  a  Bull  by  which,  at  the  request  of 
Philip  and  Mary,  he  erected  the  seignory  of 
Ireland  into  a  kingdom." 

Pope  Paul  IV.,  in  the  Bull  by  which 
Ireland  was  erected  into  a  kingdom,  makes 
no  allusion  whatever  to  any  Bulls  concern- 
ing that  country  issued  by  Popes  Adrian 
IV.,  Alexander  III.,  or  any  other  of  hia 
predecessors.  Had  this  Pontiff  known  of 
such  documents,  most  assuredly  he  would 
have  mentioned  them,  instead  of  making  a 
vague  allusion  to  the  fact  that  the  Kings 
of  England  had  acquired  the  sovereignty  <-f 
Ireland  by  or  through  the  Apostolic  See.  1 1 
is  very  apparent,  therefore,  that— down  to 
the  year  1555— the  Apostolic  See  "had  no 
knowledge  of  any  such  Bulls  ever  having 
been  issued  by  any  Pontiff  who  had  previ- 
ously occupied  the  Chair  of  Peter.  In  this 
connection  it  may  be  well  to  state  that 
it  was  not  until  half  a  century  later  that 
Baronius,  the  Papal  ecclesiastical  chronicler, 
accidently  came  across  the  Adrian  forgery 
in  the  works  of  Mathew  of  Paris  (who  had 
copied  it  from  Cambrensis)  and  entered  it 
in  the  Bullarium,  at  the  same  time  throw- 
ing discredit  upon  its  authenticity. 


In  the  Letter  which  Pope  John  XXII. 
sent  to  King  Edward  II.,  that  Pontiff  al- 
ludes to  the  Bull  attributed  to  Pope  Adrian 
IV.,  and  it  may  be  well  to  consider  the 
reasons  which  impelled  that  Pontiff  to 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


125 


f  >rward  to  the  English  monarch  the  copy 
of  the  English  forgery  which  he  had  re- 
ceived from  O'Neill  and  the  other  petition- 
ers of  Ulster.  The  reason,  it  is  plain 
enough,  was  for  no  other  purpose  than  to 
inform  the  Prince  that  the  Pope  had  no 
official  knowledge  of  any  such  document 
having  ever  existed. 

The  Bull  of  Pope  Paul  IV.,  passes  over 
in  silence  the  agreement  entered  into  in  the 
year  1213  between  Pope  Innocent  III.  and 
King  John  of  England.  It  is  a  matter  of 
historical  certainty  that  the  King  offered 
the  "kingdom  of  Ireland"  to  the  Pope,  the 
language  used  being,  "totum  regnum  Hi- 
bernice"  ("the  whole  kingdom  of  Ireland,") 
but  it  is  equally  certain  that  the  Pope  did 
not  receive  the  proffered  donation. 

As  the  Latin  proverb  runneth  :  "  Nemo 
dat  quod  non  habets ;"  "No  one  can  give 
what  he  has  not  got,"  and  thus  it  was  with 
King  John,  who,  possessing  by  force  and 
fraud  only  a  small  portion  of  the  sea  coast 
of  Ireland,  consequently  he  could  not  do- 
nate "the  whole  kingdom."  It  must  also 
be  borne  in  mind  that  no  Pontiff  would 
ever  think  of  accepting  such  a  trust  in  the 
case  of  Ireland,  as  no  such  "kingdom"  had 
any  status  in  the  diplomatic  circles  of  the 
whole  world.  In  point  of  fact,  in  order  to 
accept  the  suzerainty  of  Ireland,  it  would 
be  necessary  for  the  Holy  Father  first  to 
raise  Ireland  to  the  dignity  of  a  kingdom, 
but  as  it  is  nowhere  stated  that  the  Pope 
conferred  the  investiture  of  Ireland  on  King 
John  or  his  successors,  Pope  Paul  IV., 
knowingly  and  prudently,  kept  silent  on 
the  subject. 


Inasmuch  as  neither  the  spurious  "Bull" 
attributed  to  Pope  Adrian,  nor  the  diploma 
of  Pope  Alexander  III.,  furnishes  a  founda 
tion  for  a  title  to  Ireland,  it  will  doubtless 
puzzle  our  readers  to  account  for  the  ex- 
pression which  Pope  Paul  IV.  used  when 
he  alluded  to  the  Kings  of  England  as  hav- 
ing acquired  the  sovereignty  of  Ireland 
through  the  Holy  See. 

But  this  expression  of  the  Pope  is  easily 
accounted  fur.  In  the  meantime,  how- 
ever, we  desire  to  remind  our  readers  that 
King  John,  at  the  beginning  of  his  reign, 
took  to  himself  the  illicit  title  of  Lord  of 


Ireland,  a  title  which  had  no  foundation 
whatever,  as— even  admitting  the  spurious 
Adrian  Bull  to  be  authentic —that  docu- 
ment conferred  no  such  hereditary  right 
upon  any  of  the  descendants  of  King  Henry 
U.  And  as  it  was  Henry  II.,  who  created, 
by  his  own  usurped  and  valueless  authori'y, 
John  Lord  of  Ireland,  his  claim  to  such  a 
title  was  just  as  spurious  as  that  of  the 
"Bull"  by  which  that  royal  robber,  his  fath- 
er, made  to  himself  a  "  donation"  of  Ireland 
under  the  seal  of  a  forged  Papal  document. 

What  did  the  Popes  do  in  this  matter  ? 
Mark  the  prudence  and  justice  of  the  Vicars 
of  Christ  even  in  this  seemingly  small  mat- 
ter of  diplomatic  ettiquette.  The  Popes,  so 
far  from  acknowledging  King  John's  title 
as  "Lord  of  Ireland,"  styled  him  merely 
"Count  de  Mortagne,"  the  distinctive  title 
he  owned  prior  to  his  father's  mock  cere 
mony  by  which  he  was  put  in  illegal  posses- 
sion of  a  small  part  of  Ireland. 

After  the  death  of  King  Henry  II.,  and 
when  England  had  passed  under  the  control 
of  Richard  the  Lion-hearted,  Pope  Clement 
III. ,  having  occasion  to  speak  of  Ireland 
and  of  John  Lackland,  addressed  that  prince 
by  the  title  of  Count  de  Mortagne,  entirely 
ignoring  the  spurious  appellation  of  "  Lord 
of  Ireland." 

From  these  facts  it  may  easily  be  under- 
stood that  there  is  no  historical  co-relation 
between  the  unjust  adoption  of  King  John's 
title  and  any  concession  whatsoever  of  Eng- 
lish sovereignity  in  Ireland  by  the  Apostolic 
See.  All  that  need  be  said,  therefore,  on 
this  phase  of  the  question,  is  that  the  com- 
piler of  the  Bull  of  Pope  Paul  IV.,  traiis- 
cribed  the  request  of  Philij)  and  Mary — and 
herein  lies  the  whole  explanation. 


England  has  always  studiously  endeavored 
to  impress  upon  the  minds  of  every  succeed- 
ing generation  of  the  Irish  people  since  the 
twelfth  century,  that  British  rule  in  Ireland 
originated  with  the  Pope,  and  that  the  Irish 
people  should  look  upon  the  Holy  Father  as 
the  Lord  Suzerain  of  that  land.  But  not- 
withstanding England's  anxiety  to  impress 
this  falsehood  upon  the  minds  of  the  Irish 
people,  the  natives  of  that  land  continued 
incredulous,  and  their  incredulity  on  this 


12G 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


point  grew  stronger  with  each  succeeding 
generation.  In  order,  however,  to  apply 
the  seal  of  Papal  approval  to  that  usurped 
title,  Philip  and  Mary  had  representations 
made  to  the  Papal  Court  during  the  reign  of 
Pope  Paul  IV.,  that  the  King  of  England 
had  acquired  the  eovereignity  of  Ireland  by 
concession  of  the  Apostolic  See.  But  had 
the  ambassadors  of  the  English  monarchs 
not  stated  a  wilful  untruth  for  the  special 
purpose  of  deceiving  the  Pope,  Paul  IV. 
would  never  have  acceded  to  their  request. 


Rome  is  guided  by  justice  in  all  her  ac- 
tions. The  Holy  Father  may  be  deceived  by 
designing  conspirators  filled  with  falsehood 
in  order  to  accomplish  a  diplomatic  scheme, 
but  in  all  decisions  emanating  from  Rome, 
religion,  sound  reason  and  rigid  justice  are 
indellibly  stamped  thereon.  It  is  a  funda- 
mental principle  at  the  Roman  Chancellor's 
office,  that  concessions  on  request  are  emi- 
nently conditional  and  depend  altogether  on 
the  intentional  and  objective  veracity  of  the 
statement  of  the  facts  in  each  case.  But 
when  untruth  and  fraud  are  resorted  to, 
the  foundation  of  such  a  case  gives  way, 
and  all  rights  conferred  through  such  mis- 
representation crumbles  into  useless  and 
valueless  atoms. 


In  no  matter  that  comos  before  it  for  ad- 
judication is  the  Holy  See  more  particularly 
scrutinizing  and  just  than  in  the  preserva- 
tion of  the  rights  of  others.  This  is  clear  in 
the  Bull  of  Pope  Paul  IV.,  wherein  that 
Pontiff  throws  this  guard  around  the  rights 
of  the  Irish  people  :  "  Sine  prejudicio  ju- 
rinm  ipsius  Romanov  Ecclesice,  et  cvjuscnm- 
que  alterius  in  ilia  (insula)  vel  ad  illam  jns 
habere  prcetendentis." 

The  Consistorial  Decree  contains  the  same 
reservation,  and  this  consideration  on  the 
part  of  the  Pontiff  for  the  reserved  rights  of 
the  Irish  people,  did  not  only  include  their 


present  peacable  possession  (jus  in  re,)  but 
also  their  future  right  or  disputed  right  (jus 
ad  rem.) 

The  Irish  people  inhabiting  twenty  one 
counties  possessed  full  and  peacable  posses- 
sion of  their  lands  and  property,  and  the 
Holy  Father  had  no  intention  whatever  of 
altering  their  condition  in  favor  of  the  Eng- 
lish invaders.  Rome,  therefore,  left  to  the 
Irish  people  the  right  to  win  back  the  ter- 
ritory possessed  by  the  invaders,  as  well  as 
to  hold  intact  that  portion  of  Ireland  which 
had  then  held  out  against  the  English 
enemy.  Neither  investiture  nor  donation 
are  alluded  to  in  any  way,  nor  did  the  Eng- 
lish usurpers  of  Irish  rights  acquire  an  iota 
of  authority  over  that  people  by  reason  of 
the  Bull  of  Pope  Paul  IV.,  elevating  Ire- 
land into  a  kingdom. 


In  treating  of  the  Bull  of  Pope  Paul  IV., 
Bzovius  relates  the  private  conversation 
that  Pontiff  held  with  the  ambassadors  of 
Queen  Mary.  At  this  private  audience,  says 
Bzovius,  the  Pope  complained  that  the  ec- 
clesiastical goods  pillaged  by  the  English  in- 
vaders from  the  Irish  churches,  monasteries 
and  abbeys,  had  not  been  restored,  and  he 
reminded  them  that  the  restitution  should 
be  full  and  absolute  on  the  part  of  the  pil- 
fering usurpers.  The  Holy  Father  re- 
minded them  that  the  English  ought  to 
know  that  such  sacrilegious  robberies  would 
draw  down  upon  their  perpetrators  the 
maledictions  of  Almighty  God.  The  Pope, 
therefore,  urged  the  ambassadors  to  write  to 
their  monarchs  on  this  matter  and  to  coun- 
sel them  to  make  full  and  immediate  resti- 
tution. But  to  England's  shame  be  it  said, 
the  pilfering  and  sacrilege  of  the  fourteenth 
century  was  continued  down  to  the  niner 
teenth  century,  regardless  alike  of  the  sacred 
rights  of  God  or  the  natural  rights  of  the 
Irish  people 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


127 


CH  APTEK      XXII. 

A  New  and  Important  -Witness  to  the  Fraudulent  Character  of  the  Adrian  and  Alex- 
ander Bulls.  — Selections  from  the  Celebrated  Historical  Work  "  Cambrensis 
Eversus, "  by  Dr.  John  Lynch.— Seventeenth  Century  Evidence  Against  both 
the  Spurious  Documents. 


In  the  first  portion  of  this  volume  we 
made  a  passing  allusion  to  a  celebrated 
work  on  Ireland  entitled  Cambrensia  Ever- 
nus*  by  Dr.  John  Lynch,  and  expressed 
our  regret  that  the  work  was  so  rare  that 
not  a  copy  of  it  could  be  found  on  the  Pa- 
citic  coast.  Fortunately,  however,  tlirough 
the  great  kindness  of  friends,  a  copy  was 
purchased  in  London,  and  now  we  are 
enabled  to  lay  before  our  readers  some  very 
important  evidence  which  hitherto  has 
been  completely  hidden  from  public  gaz« 
both  in  consequence  of  the  high  price  of 
Dr.  John  Lynch 's  invaluable  work,  as 
well  as  from  the  fact  that  but  very  few 
copies  of  this  historical  work  are  for  sale  in 
any  portion  of  the  world. 

Cambrensis  Everms  consists  of  a  general 
history  of  Ireland  from  the  earliest  ages, 
and  from  the  amount  of  historical  matter 
to  be  found  in  this  vast  store-house  of  Irish 
lore,  we  are  surprised  that  so  little  atten- 
tion has  been  given  to  the  exhaustive  work 
of  an  author  whom  we  look  upon  as  cer- 
tainly the  most  truthful,  polished  and 
learned  among  all  the  men  who  have  ever 
attempted  to  write  on  Ireland. 

Dr.  Lynch  devotes  but  a  few  chapters 
to  the  consideration  of  the  bogus  Bull  at- 
tributed to  Popes  Adrian  and  Alexander, 
but — as  our  readers  will  discern  further  on 
— in  that  brief  space,  he  has  furnished  such 
proof  of  the  spuriousness  of  these  docu- 
ments that  not  a  doubt  can  remain  in  the 
mind  of  any  impartial  reader. 

The  forger  of   the  falsely- called  Adrian 

*  The  full  title  of  the  work  is,  "  Cambrensis 
Eversus ;  or  Refutation  of  the  Authority  of  Gir- 
aid-as  Cambrensis  on  the  History  of  Ireland.  By 
Dr.  John  Lynch  (1662),  with  some  account  of 
the  affairs  of  that  kiu^-ioin  during  bis  own  and 
former  times.  Edited,  with  translation  and 
copious  notes,  by  the  Rev.  Matthew  Kelly, 
Royal  College  of  St.  Patrick,  Maynooth.  Pub- 
lished in  Dublin  by  the  Celtic  Society,  during 
the  years  1849-50  and  1851." 


Bull,  our  readers  will  remember,  insinu- 
ates in  that  document  that  the  Catholic 
population  of  Ireland  in  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury was  steeped  in  vice  both  morally  and 
intellectually.  In  order  to  show  the  falsity 
of  the  forged  document,  and  also  to  over- 
throw the  aspersions  made  by  Giraldus 
Cambrensis  upon  the  moral  character  of 
the  faithful  Irish  Catholic  people,  Dr. 
Lynch,  in  the  work  before  us,  devotes 
three  chapters  of  the  second  volume 
to  that  disputed  point,  and  although  we 
have  touched  upon  that  aspect  of  the  ques- 
tion under  consideration  already,  in  a  brief 
way,  we  feel  that  Dr.  Lynch's  evidence  will 
not  only  add  to  the  share  of  useful  knowledge 
which  every  Catholic  should  possess,  but  it 
will  also  re-affirm  the  fact  that  neither  in 
the  twelfth  century,  nor  at  any  time  an- 
terior or  subsequent,  were  the  morals,  cus- 
toms or  habits  of  the  Irish  people  in  that 
state  of  degradation  set  forth  by  the  no- 
torious Giraldus  Cambrensis,  the  English 
falsifier,  whose  untruths  were  so  numerous 
as  to  gain  for  him  the  very  doubtful  honor 
of  being  distinguished  from  all  other  his- 
torical writers  as  the  man  who  "could  not 
tell  the  truth  except  by  accident." 

Alluding  to  the  charge  made  against  the 
piety  and  morality  of  the  Irish  people  by 
Giraldus  Cambren&is,  Dr.  Lynch  says  :t 

St  11  adhering  to  his  original  error,  our 
author  here  gives  Muircheartach  the  title 
of  king  of  Ireland,  though  our  annalists 
make  him  only  successor  to  his  father  on 
the  throne  ot  Munster,  and  assign  hid 
death  to  11C7.  Perhaps  it  may  be  Muir- 
cheartach Mac  Lochlinn,  who  was  pro- 
claimed king  of  Ireland  in  the  year  of  our 
Lord  1157,  and  reigned  to  his  death  in 
1166.  If  all  other  circumstances  con- 
curred, we  may  consistently  with  chronol- 
ogy, maintain  that  he  was  the  king  referred 
to  in  the  chronicle ;  for  Pope  Adrian 


t  Vol.  II.,  chap,  xxi.,  page  403,  et  seq. 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


brea*  lied  his  last  in  1159.  Now,  as  these 
journeys  which  took  place  in  his  day  evi- 
dently prove  that  Irish  kings  at  home  and 
Irish  ecclesiastics  abroad  were  zealous  in 
good  works,  is  it  not  impossible  to  believe 
that  Pope  Adrian  would  solemnly  have 
charged  the  Irish  with  depravity  of  morals  ? 
Would  not  the  fear  alone  of  being  de- 
nounced as  ungrateful  have  deterred  him 
from  maligning  them  ?  It  is  utterly  abhor- 
rent to  reason,  that  the  only  mark  of  his 
gratitude  for  the  service  of  his  Irish  pre- 
ceptor Marianus,  should  be  to  transmit  to 
posterity  a  defamatory  character  of  that 
preceptor's  native  country  ;  especially  when 
he  must  have  seen  Irishmen  rising  in  for- 
eign countries  to  such  eminence  in  learning 
and  piety,  as  to  be  selected  for  the  arduous 
honor  of  instructing  others. 

Every  person  who  has  even  a  slight 
knowledge  of  the  Christian  religion,  is  very 
well  aware  that  it  would  be  a  crime  to  de- 
sert one's  country,  when  it  is  plunged  in 
savage  depravity  and  universal  ignorance 
of  the  rudiments  of  faith,  and  to  go  plant 
an  abundant  harvest  of  virtue  and  religion 
on  a  foreign  soil,  while  barrenness  and 
aridity  wastes  the  whole  extent  of  his  na- 
tive land.  The  men  who  were  so  eminent 
for  all  other  virtues,  assuredly  cannot  be 
supposed  deficient  in  charity,  which  requires 
that  its  fruits  should  begin  at  home,  with 
ourselves  and  our  friends,  before  it  extends 
its  beneficence  to  others.  St.  Paul  desired 
to  become  an  anathema  for  his  brethren 
according  to  the  flesh,  nor  would  those 
Irish  have  gone  out  in  "  crowds,"  as  our 
author  says,  "  to  instruct  foreign  nations  in 
virtue  and  learning,  if  there  was  not  abund- 
ance of  public  instructors  left  after  them  at 
home. " 

The  Pope,  after  duly  weighing  those 
facts,  would  certainly  have  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  Irish  could  not  teach 
abroad  what  they  had  not  learned  at  home. 
He  must  have  known,  that  either  immedi- 
ately before  or  during  his  pontificate, 
Dionysius,  Isaac,  Gervas,  Conrad,  his  pre- 
ceptor Marianus,  Christian  and  Gregorius 
at  Ratisbon,  Maurus  and  twelve  other 
monks,  in  the  monastery  of  Maniurgghen, 
and  Macarius,  with  his  twelve  associates  at 
Wurzburg,  were  celebrated  for  their  sanc- 
tity and  learning. 

At  home  in  Ireland  every  diocese  had  its 
Bishop,  every  parish  its  priest,  old  monas- 
teries were  repaired,  new  ones  were  built, 
and  all  abundantly  supplied  with  monks. 
The  written  catalogues  of  Sees  and  mon- 
asteries prove  the  uninterrupted  succession 
of  bishops  and  monks.  So  great  was  the 
number  of  priests  in  Ireland,  that  500  of 
them  assembled  in  council  in  1143,  with 
twelve  bishops  and  Muireadach  O'Dubh- 
thaich,  Archbishop  of  Tuam.  Catholicus, 


Archbishop  «f  the  same  See,  a  prudent  and 
a  learned   man    (for   his   am-),    was   accom- 
panied to  the  Council  of  Lateral),   1170,  by 
Lorcan,    Archbishop    of  Dublin,    Cuim   of 
Kill  da  lua,  Brie  of  Limerick,  Augustine  of 
Waterford,    and    Felix    of     Lismore.       If 
their  flocks  were   plunged  in   that  hideous 
barbarism  charged  against  all  the  Irish   l>y 
some  writers,  how   could    they   be    worthy 
of  being  called  to  a  distant  place  to  sit   in 
council  on  the   important  interests  of  the 
Catholic  world ;  men  who  either  could  not 
or  would  not  heal   the  infirmities   of    those 
whom  they  were  bound  by  duty  to  protect  ? 
That  Pope,  at  all  events,  would   not  sum- 
mon them,  who  is  said  to  have  made  over 
the  dominion  of  Ireland  to  King  Henry  to 
improve   the   morality   of  the   Irish.    This 
fact  alone  justifies  a   strong  suspicion   that 
the  Bull  attributed   to   Pope  Alexander  is 
as  spurious  or  at   least     as     surreptitious, 
as  that  by  which   Pope   Adrian   is   said   to 
have  annexed  Ireland  to  the  dominions   of 
King  Henry.     Neither  could  it  ever  be  re- 
ported that  St.  Lorcan,  Archbishop  of  Dub 
lin,  had,  in  his  patriotic  zeal,  obtained  some 
privileges  from  Pope  Alexander,  derogatory 
tO'the  dignity  of  the  crown  if  the  author- 
ity   of    the    same   Alexander  had  already 
armed  Henry  for  the  conquest  of  Ireland. 
The  Pope  would  never  have  made  St.  Lor- 
can his  legate,  who  he  knew  had  taken  the 
field  against  Henry  at  the  siege  of  Dublin, 
and  encouraged  others  to  take  arms.     The 
Pope  could  not  have   been   guilty  of  such 
inconsistencies.      Nor    could     St.      Lorcan 
himself,  a  Prelate  so  eminent  for  his  piety, 
and  so  obedient  to  the  Supreme  Pastor  of 
the  Church,  ever  have  so  openly  resisted  by 
his  letters,  his  council,  and  his  arms,   those 
bulls  of  the  Pope,    had  they  really  existed. 
There  are   most  abundant   reasons,    there- 
fore, for  believing  that  those  bulls,  which  1 
am  about  to  produce,  were  never  issued  by 
the  Popes. 

In  the  following  chapter  Dr.  Lynch 
gives  the  text  of  the  spurious  Adrian  Bull, 
and  comments  on  it  at  some  length,  but  as 
we  have  already  included  in  the  evidence 
presented,  several  of  the  points  dwelt  upon 
in  the  pages  of  Cambrentia  Eversus,  we  will 
extract  only  those  portions  which  will  intro- 
duce new  testimony  in  proof  of  the  fraudu- 
lent character  of  the  papal  documents 
forged  in  England. 

After  citing  the  names  of  numerous  Irish 
ecclesiastics  famous  for  their  apostolic  zeal 
and  rich  in  every  Christian  virtue,  Dr. 
Lynch  says : 

We  know  from  Colgan  that  Muirchear- 
tach,  Marianus,  Clement,  John,  Isaac,  Can- 


THE       POPE       AND       IKELANJJ. 


129 


did  us,  Magnoald,  and  many  others  went 
over  to  Ratisbon  about  this  period,  and 
refreshed  the  inhabitants  of  that  city  and 
its  environs  with  the  salutary  waters  of 
piety  and  learning.  No  person  can  imagine 
for  a  moment  that  these  holy  men  were  so 
lost  to  the  feelings  of  humanity  as  to  re- 
nounce that  love  which  all  men  bear  to  the 
land  of  their  birth  ;  if  they  had  not  well 
known  that  Ireland  was  abundantly  sup- 
plied with  teachers,  to  conduct  her  in  the 
ways  of  salvation  and  civilized  institutions, 
they  would  have  been  more  mindful  of  the 
duties  of  well-regulated  charity,  and  de- 
voted themselves  to  the  instruction  of  their 
countrymen  at  home,  rather  than  of 
strangers  abroad.  Our  Saviour  Himself  first 
began  by  instructing  His  own  countrymen, 
the  Jews,  and  then  proceeded  to  conduct 
the  Gentiles  from  the  darkness  of  ignor- 
ance. Who  ever  watered  another  man's 
field,  when  his  own  was  parched  with 
drought  ?  Do  not  the  laws  themselves  de- 
clare that  it  is  severe  and  akiu  to  cruelty 
to  turn  a  water- course  from  your  own 
estate,  for  the  use  of  others,  to  the  injury 
of  your  neighbors,  and  while  your  own 
fields  are  parched  ?  I  beg  of  any  person 
who  reads  this  to  consider  for  a  moment 
how  many  kings  of  Ireland  and  princes 
as  I  have  proved,  by  the  testimony  even 
of  foreign  writers,  nobly  discharged  their 
duties  as  kings  ?  How  many  monasteries 
were  erected  as  great  nurseries  of  literature 
and  piety?  How  many  retreats  of  anchor- 
ites] How  many  facilities  were  afforded 
for  the  acquisition  of  learning  ?  Masters  in 
all  branches  of  science  being  ready  to  in- 
struct all  comers  in  the  cathedrals,  the 
colleges  and  the  monasteries.  The  man 
must  either  have  no  conscience,  or  not  be 
in  his  right  senses,  who  would  hand  over 
the  government  of  such  a  people  to  a  for- 
eign prince,  on  the  sole  grounds  of  reform- 
ing their  morals. 

This  bull,  therefore,  mnst  be  a  forgery 
of  some  unknown  impostor,  and  not  the 
decree  of. Adrian,  He  was  raised  to  the 
purple  by  Eugene  the  Third,  and  was  col- 
league in  chat  great  dignity  with  Eugene's 
legate,  John  Papyro,  a  man  of  the  strictest 
integrity,  and  praised  in  the  highest  terms 
by  St.  Bernard  in  his  Epistles.  Adrian 
could  have  easily  ascertained  that  during 
the  legatine  mission  of  his  colleague,  Pap- 
yro, all  the  disorders  of  Ireland  had  been 
rectified.  Moreover,  he  must  have  heard, 
if  he  had  not  actually  seen  with  his  eyes,  the 
great  works  accomplished  by  St.  Mael- 
maedhog ;  for  it  is  natural  to  suppose  that 
as  both  were  members  of  the  same  Order 
of  Canons  Regular,  the  surviving  brother 
would  make  some  inquiries  into  the  life 
of  one  who  had  but  recently  departed. 

When  the  devils  appear  in   the   form   of 


angels  of  light,  to  deceive  men,  they  are 
always  betrayed  by  the  cloven  foot  or  some 
other  mark.  The  forgers  of  documents,  in 
the  same  way,  let  something  unwittingly 
escape  them,  which  reveals  the  fraud.  I 
have  already  given  one  instance.  Here 
follows  another,  given  by  the  concoctur  of 
the  bull. 

Dr.  Lynch  then  alludes  to  the  Peter  Pence 
clauses  of  the  spurious  Bull,  and  also  to 
the  allusion  in  the  fictitious  Bull  concerning 
the  supposed  right  conferred  on  the  Pope 
over  Ireland  by  reason  of  the  alleged  dona- 
tion of  Constantino,  but  as  we  have  already 
alluded  to  both  these  phases  of  the  ques- 
tion, we  will  pass  on  to  where  Dr.  Lynch 
mentions  the  reasons  which  impelled  King 
Henry  II.  to  conceal  the  forged  Bull  for 
seventeen  years  : 

But  there  are  still  more  powerful  ob- 
jections against  this  bull  than  any  of  those 
which  have  been  mentioned.  And  first, 
Baronius  assures  us  that  no  date  either  of 
day  or  year  is  given  in  it,  a  circumstance 
which,  of  itself  alone,  is  a  certain  ground 
of  suspecting  any  document  as  a  forgery, 
and  which  authorizes  us  to  reject  it  as  such. 
'•  A  rescript  (says  Masuerus)  which  does 
not  give  its  date,  the  day,  the  consul,  and 
the  year  of  our  Lord,  is  invalid." 

Moreover,  this  bull,  when  obtained  by 
secret  solicitations,  was  for  a  long  time 
suppressed,  for  the  writers  state  that  it  was 
given  in  1155,  but  not  published  before 
the  year  1172,  as  if  the  imprudence  of  ob- 
taining it  were  to  be  prudently  remedied 
by  suppressing  it.  For  second  thoughts 
are  best.  Stolen  goods  are  not  exhibited 
publicly  very  soon.  But  Nicholas  Trivetus, 
A.  D.,  1155,  says  that  the  Bull  was  not 
produced,  because  when  "King  Henry,  in 
a  parliament  at  Windsor,  was  deliberating 
with  his  barons  on  the  conquest  of  Ire- 
land, his  mother,  the  empress,  was  opposed 
to  the  project,  and  its  execution  was  there- 
fore deferred  to  another  time."  So  that  it 
would  appear  this  noble  and  virtuous  lady, 
more  humane  than  the  king  who  demanded, 
more  just  than  the  Bishop  who  received, 
more  merciful  than  the  Pope  who  granted 
the  bull,  abhorred  the  execrable  design ; 
but  when  an  opportunity  offered  after  her 
death,  the  project  was  revived  and  the  ex- 
pedition undertaken.  But  as  "a  rescript  is 
null,  if  the  petitioner  do  not  avail  himself 
of  it  within  a  year,"  of  what  service  could 
this  grant  be  to  king  Henry  who  concealed 
it  during  seventeen  years,  without  even 
availing  himself  of  the  rights  which  it  cor- 
ferred  upon  him  ? 

Moreover,  the  author  of  the  bull  uncon- 
sciously represents  a  most  virtuous  Pope  as 


130 


THK       POPK       AND       inEI.ANH. 


traMipling  on  the  law  of  nature,  on  the  laws 
of  nations,  and  on  all  the  laws  cf  justice. 
F»r  in  it  not  a  violation  of  all  the  dictates 
"f  all  laws,  to  rob,  not  one  roan,  but  a  whole 
nation,  not  of  some  trifling  right,  but  of 
their  country,  their  fortunes,  and  their 
lives,  without  hearing  one  word  in  their  de- 
fence /  D  .es  the  humblest  official  that  ad- 
ministers justice,  presume  to  adjudicate  on 
a  case  without  having  heard  the  statements 
»f  both  parties?  Whoever  decides  after 
hearing  one  side  only,  "  ia  unjust,  though 
his  judgment  should  be  just." 

The  judge,  who  is  influenced  by  favor 
and  not  by  equity  in  his  judgments,  is  not 
only  branded  among  men  with  the  foulest 
stigma  of  disgrace,  but  incurs,  moreover, 
the  damnation  of  his  immortal  soul.  God 
himself  says,  "judge  that  which  is  just, 
whether  he  be  one  of  your  country  or  a  for- 
eigner." For  who  can  look  upon  himself  as 
the  friend,  when  he  assumes  the  character  of 
the  judge  I  Liberty  is  the  dearest  right  of 
man ;  and  whoever  deprives  him  of  it,  and 
unjustly  hands  over  princes,  prelates  and 
people  to  a  foreign  yoke,  is  excessively 
temerarious,  and  (to  use  the  mildest  phrase) 
unjust. 

The  concoctor  of  this  bull,  therefore, 
merits  the  most  hearty  execration  for  repre- 
senting the  character  of  a  Pope  in  so  odious 
a  light.  He  represents  him  in  the  first  place 
as  having  no  title  to  be  called  an  honest 
man  ;  next,  as  a  man  who  was  swayed  by 
his  own  interests,  not  by  justice  ;  then  as 
c  mdemning  the  innocent  without  a  hearing ; 
a  ,'ain  as  subverting  that  kingdom  of  Ireland, 
which  had  never  before  own«*d  any  foreign 
]>  >wer  ;  moreover,  as  the  credulous  dupe  of 
whispering  slanderers,  the  violator  of  the 
rights  of  immemorial  possessions  ;  the  enemy 
of  all  laws  ;  the  most  profligate  scoffer  at 
all  religions  ;  finally,  the  firebrand  of  exe- 
crable war,  and  the  most  odious  propagator 
of  burning  hatred.  See  the  load  of  ig- 
nominy which  this  vile  scribe  would  heap 
upon  the  head  of  a  Pontiff  whose  virtues 
were  not  a  disgrace  to  his  high  station  ;  cal- 
umniously  representing  him  as  trampling 
upon  every  principle  of  justice  to  make  his 
prince  sovereign  lord  of  Ireland.  He  cared 
not  in  what  odious  colors  this  lying  bull 
exhibited  the  Pope,  if  he  attained  his  ob- 
ject, and  gave  the  king  of  England  some 
•hadow  of  title  to  the  Irish  crown.  He  for- 
gets the  maxims  of  positive  law,  "  That  re- 
scripts are  invalid,  which  were  either  ob- 
tained on  false  grounds,  or  are  opposed  to 
the  Divine  law,  to  human  positive  law,  or 
to  the  public  good  ;  "  and  also  "  that  a  re- 
script of  the  Pope,  obtained  by  a  layman, 
on  any  matter  regarding  the  secular  forum, 
can  have  no  effect ;  "  finally,  "  that  a  re- 
script is  invalid,  if  obtained  to  the  injury  of 
a  third  person. "  After  this  exposure  of  the 


base  arts  by  which  this  treacherous  villian 
attempts  to  blast  the  character  of  an  excel  • 
lent  Pontiff,  we  proceed  to  refute  all  his 
other  quibbling. 

But  to  clothe  the  nakedness  of  this  story: 
Matthew  of  Westminster,  who  lived  about 
200  years  later,  borrowed  some  false 
plumage  from  his  own  imagination,  for  he 
was  the  first  who  said  that  a  solemn  em- 
bassy was  dispatched  by  order  of  king 
Henry  to  Pope  Adrian,  then  lately  elected, 
to  obtain  this  bull.  Such  is  the  general  lot 
of  stories,  circulated  among  the  vulgar  ;  the 
farther  they  travel,  the  greater  bulk  and 
consistency  they  acquire.  Matthew,  seeing 
that  this  flagrantly  fictitious  bull  had  lived 
to  so  respectable  an  age,  could  not  think  of 
allowing  it  to  go  farther  on  its  journey  with- 
out giving  it  a  retinue  ;  and  accordingly, 
without  any  warrant  from  the  bull  itself,  or 
from  any  preceding  writer,  he  draws  upon  his 
own  creative  powers.  A  common  courier, 
bearing  the  bull  from  Adrian  to  Henry, 
was  too  vulgar  a  picture  for  the  page  of  his- 
tory, and  accordingly  Matthew  metamor- 
phoses him  into  a  solemn  embassy  ;  but  with 
his  kind  permission,  the  interval  of  so  many 
centuries  c?nnot  be  so  easily  bridged  over 
by  his  mere  authority,  that  we  must  credu- 
lously believe  his  word,  without  the  support 
of  a  single  writer  from  our  own  day,  to  the 
supposed  date  of  the  bull. 

Dr.  Lynch  next  alludes  to  the  fabulous 
stories  attributed  to  John  of  Salisbury  in 
the  interpolated  chapter  of  his  Polycraticun, 
which  we  have  already  reviewed  extensively, 
so  we  will  pass  on  to  where  the  learned  au 
thor  of  Cambrerisis  Eversus  exposes  in  a 
most  thorough  manner  the  errors  of  Mat- 
thew of  Paris : 

Still  drawing  on  his  imagination,  Matthew 
asserts  "  that  the  Pope  empowered  king 
Henry  to  enter  Ireland  by  force  of  arms 
and  subj  ugate  it, ''  though  the  bull  expressly 
orders  the  reverse,  "  that  the  people  of  that 
land  should  receive  Henry  with  honor,  and 
venerate  him  as  their  lord. "  Thus,  with  con- 
summate treachery,  the  Pope  would  publicly 
command  the  Irish  to  obey  the  Englishman, 
and  encourage  him  privately  to  cut  their 
throats.  So  with  heartless  barbarity  he 
would  order  the  Irish  to  embrace  with  open 
arms  the  man  who  pointed  his  sword  at  their 
heart ;  with  horrible  rigor  he  would  rob  of 
their  native  land  a  people  guilty  of  none,  or 
at  least  of  trifling  offences,  and  punish  with 
the  excruciating  scourge  a  fault  that  at  worst 
deserved  the  whip ;  in  fine,  he  would  repeal 
that  law  of  nature,  which  tells  a  man  to  re- 
pel force  by  force.  That  law  is.  not  written, 
but  born  with  us  ;  we  have  not  learned  nor 
received  it  from  others,  nor  read  it  in 
books ;  it  is  the  dictate,  the  impulse,  the 


THE      POPE      AXD       IUKLAND. 


131 


cry  of  nature,  to  which  we  have  not  been 
schooled,  but  created,  not  influenced  by 
others,  but  inspired  :  if  your  life  is  in  dan- 
ger from  treachery,  or  from  violence, 
whether  of  robbers  or  of  enemies,  all  means 
of  defence  are  justifiable.  It  is  intolerable 
that  Matthew  should  exhibit  the  Pope  in 
colors  of  such  varied  malignity,  and  deprive 
Irishmen  of  the  right  even  of  the  slave. 
What  slave  could  brook  those  edicts  of  a 
Manlius  or  Phalaris,  even  from  his  master  I 
Were  he  ordered,  for  no  crime,  to  hold  his 
throat  for  the  murderer,  would  he  not  in- 
fallibly resist  with  all  his  might  ? 

Tyranny  of  that  kind  was  never  known, 
u  der  the  mild  government  of  the  Popes, 
whose  pious  and  learned  delegates  employed 
gentle  and  persevering  persuasions,  not  vio- 
lence and  platoons,  to  civilize  the  hearts  of 
men,  lighting  by  admonition  the  path  for 
voluntary  obedience,  not  goading  them 
against  their  will  at  the  point  of  the  sword. 
When  the  Apostles  went  forth  to  propagate 
the  Faith,  they  were  not  allowed  to  carry 
even  a  staff ;  and  can  it  be  lawful  for  their 
successors  in  that  sacred  duty  to  force  by 
arms  some  nameless  sort  of  reformation  on 
men  eminently  instructed  in  religion  ? 
Arms  rather  barbarize  than  civilize  man  ; 
war  destroys  learning  and  law  ;  levels  cities, 
burns  houses,  devastates  land,  tramples  the 
corn  fields,  begets  murder,  adultery,  incest, 
rapes,  and  rapine  ;  in  a  word,  throws  every- 
thing into  disorder.  A  most  contemptible 
fool  the  man  must  be,  who  first  invented  the 
story  of  the  adoption  by  the  Apostolic  See 
of  so  preposterous  a  mode  of  reforming  the 
morals  of  any  nation  :  Christ  addressing  His 
Apostles  said  to  them  :  "if  they  do  not  re- 
ceive you,  going  forth,  shake  off  the  dust  of 
your  feet"  at  them.  He  does  not  say,  gird 
on  your  swords,  brandish  your  daggers,  cast 
your  javelins,  in  a  word,  make  war  on  them. 

St.  Bernard  addressed  a  work  De  Con- 
sider atioiie,  to  Pope  Eugene,  which  Adrian 
no  doubt  perused  attentively  ;  it  was  then  a 
new  book  and  of  course  was  eagerly  sought 
for  and  read  with  avidity,  especially  as 
coming  from  so  illustrious  a  man,  and  pro- 
posing to  admonish  Pope  Eugene  of  the 
duties  of  his  office,  a  point  on  which  Adrian 
himself,  as  Harpsfeld  informs  us,  was  ex- 
tremely solicitous.  Adrian,  moreover,  had 
a  singular  respect  for  Eugene,  by  whom  he 
had  been  raised  to  the  episcopacy  and  ap- 
pointed legate,  and  elevated  to  the  College 
of  the  Cardinals  ;  and  moreover,  Eugene 
had  occupied  the  snme  Apostolic  chair,  im- 
mediately before  Anastasius,  Adrian's  pre- 


decessor. Now,  in  this  book,  which  must 
have  had  so  many  irresistible  attractions  for 
Adrian,  he  could  read  that  "  it  is  not  domi- 
nation, but  Apostleship  over  the  world  that 
becomes  the  Vicars  of  Christ :  "  and  also  St. 
Leo,  "  that  (Rome)  held  more  extensive 
sway  by  the  Divine  religion  than  by  earthly 
empire.'  Could  he  then  allow  himself  to 
be  carried  so  far  from  the  line  of  his  duty, 
as  to  let  loose  an  army  for  the  massacre  of  the 
Irish,  at  the  very  moment  that  his  legates 
were  laboriously  and  successfully  discharging 
their  duty  in  Ireland  1  Would  he  present  an 
antidote  in  one  hand,  and  the  poisoned  cup 
in  the  other  ?  The  virtuous  Pope  could  not 
so  far  contemn  the  laws  of  prudence  and 
justice  as  to  arrogate  to  himself  a  power 
never  claimed  by  any  of  his  predecessors. 
Whenever  nations  were  contaminated  with 
any  horrible  crimes,  the  censures  of  the 
Church  were  always  used  before  an  appeal 
to  arms,  that  they  might  be  induced  to  re- 
pent by  prayers  and  threats,  rather  than 
compelled  by  the  eloquence  of  the  sword. 
The  charges  of  the  accusers  were  heard  in 
one  ear  ;  the  defence  of  the  accused  in  the 
other  ;  both  were  not  open  to  the  former, 
both  were  not  closed  to  the  latter.  Puni^h- 
ment  was  invariably  preceded  by  admoni- 
tion ;  nor  were  blemishes  of  a  lighter  na- 
ture ever  punished  by  the  ruin  of  a  whole 
nation.  The  Apostles  permitted  the  Jews 
to  use  those  peculiar  customs  which  were 
only  gradually  and  insensibly  eradicated. 
St.  Gregorious  writes  to  St.  Augustinus,  the 
Apostle  of  England,  "  what  cannot  be  easily 
reformed  must  be  tolerated  ;  the  Church 
must  purge  away  some  things  by  her  fervor, 
tolerate  others  by  her  mildness,  and  over- 
look others  by  her  prudence. "  St.  Augus- 
tinus also  asserts  '•  that  the  very  change  of 
a  custom  however  beneficial  in  itself,  causes 
disorder  by  its  novelty  ;  "  and  St.  Gregorius 
tells  us  "that  they  who  wish  to  propagate 
the  faith  by  severe  methods,  show  that 
they  love  their  own  cause  more  than  the 
cause  of  God."  The  forger  of  the  bull 
intimates  very  plainly  either  that  the  Pope's 
understanding  was  wrapt  in  such  a  night  of 
ignorance  as  not  to  know  these  things,  or 
that  his  will  was  steeled  by  such  depravity, 
that  he  knowingly  and  willingly  dishonored 
his  name,  and  damned  his  conscience  by 
so  execrable  a  crime.  History  and  common 
sense  clearly  attest  the  falseness  of  such  an 
inference.  And  hence,  a  bull  which  is  vul- 
nerable in  so  many  points,  evidently  cannot 
have  any  authority.  What  has  been  already 
said  appears  of  itself  sufficient  to  refute  it. 


THK       POPK       AND       IKKI.ANH. 


CHAPTER    XXIII. 

More  Proofs  of  the  Spurious  Character  of  the  Adrian  and  Al>  xandt-r  Bulls,  from 
the  "  Cambrensis  Evcrsus"  of  Dr.  John  Lynch.— That  Eminent  Scholia's 
Criticisms  on  the  Alexander  Forgery. 


In  the  twenty-third  chapter  of  his  great 
work  entitled  Cambrensis  Euersus,  Dr. 
Lynch  passes  under  review  the  singular- 
ly-worded document  falsely  attributed  by 
some  writers  to  Pope  Alexander  III.  After 
giving  the  text  of  the  document  in  ques- 
tion, the  scholarly  author  we  quote  frora 
says  : 

This  Bull,  which  is  grounded  on  the 
former,  is,  most  undoubtedly,  equally  devoid 
of  authority.  I  have  many  reasons  for  as- 
serting that  both  were  forged  by  the  same 
hand,  though,  like  the  sources  of  the  Nile, 
their  paternity  is  yet  a  mystery.  Be  it  ob- 
sejved  in  the  first  place,  that  of  all  the 
arguments  already  advanced  against  the 
former  Bull,  there  is  not  one  which  does 
not  apply  with  equal  force  to  this,  so  that 
if  anything  appear  incomplete  in  my  reason- 
ing here,  its  defects  can  be  supplied  from 
the  preceding  chapter.  ***** 

Can  any  man  in  his  senses  believe,  that 
the  Supreme  pastor  of  the  church  would 
entrust  the  moral  regeneration  of  Ireland, 
and  the  amelioration  of  her  ecclesiastical 
discipline,  to  a  king  who  surpassed  William 
Rufus,  Henry  I.,  and  King  Stephen  (im- 
moral men,  all,  as  I  have  shown),  nay,  all 
his  predecessors  and  successors,  by  intem- 
perately  cherishing  his  great  power,  to  as- 
sail and  destroy  and  disgrace  the  dignity 
of  the  Church  (  A  man  who  stood  forth 
prominently  as  the  enemy  of  the  Pope,  and 
strained  all  his  might  to  nullify  the  laws  and 
destroy  the  authority  of  the  Apostolic  See  ; 
who  sacrilegiously  ordered  the  ecclesiastical 
Orders  of  his  kingdom  to  be  dragged  before 
lay  tribunals,  and  exerted  all  his  power  to 
destroy  every  vestige  of  the  ancient  im- 
munities of  the  ecclesiastical  body  ( 

Take  up,  one  by  one,  his  crimes  against 
the  Church,  and  with  their  proofs.  The 
first  sparks  of  his  fury  against  her,  burst 
forth  in  his  burning  hatred  of  St.  Thomas, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  This  was  the 
black  source  of  the  evil.  Taking  the  others 
in  order,  you  have  in  the  year  1163,  the 
foundations  of  the  contests  laid  at  West- 
minster, the  king  fiercely  insisting  on  the 
enactment  of  some  unjust  laws,  most  op- 
pressive to  the  ecclesiastical  Order,  though 
introduced  under  the  imposing  title  of  an- 


ciet.t  customs,  which  St.  Thomas  firmly 
resisted.  In  the  year  1104,  King  Henry, 
according  to  Hoveden,  issued  a  severe  and 
execrable  edict  against  Pope  Alexander 
III.,  for  it  was  in  this  year  that  he  carried 
the  constitutions  of  Clarendon,  prohibiting 
obedience  to  the  commands  of  the  Roman 
Pontiff,  and  declaring  all  censures  issued 
by  him  or  St.  Thomas,  null  and  void,  and 
entailing  severe  penalties.  Baronius  truly 
sketches  the  character  of  this  king :  "  Hen- 
ry excited  a  storm  to  overwhelm  not  only 
the  Primate  of  Canterbury  and  the  whole 
English  Church,  but  to  destroy  the  Holy 
Catholic  Church  herself,  with  Alexander 
her  chief  pastor,  who  was  the  special  object 
of  It  is  mu  cliimitions. " 

What  better  witness  could  you  have  of 
the  wickedness  of  King  Henry  than  the 
Pope  himself  ?  He  held  the  authority  of 
the  Apostolic  See  in  such  sovereign  con- 
tempt, that  he  told  the  Cardinals  sent  to 
him  by  Alexander  III,  in  1169,  "  I  care 
not  for  you  or  your  excommunications  ;  I 
value  them  no  more  than  a  single  egg  ''  To 
such  a  pitch  of  frenzy  did  he  ascend  at  last, 
that  he  stands  charged  with  the  murder  of 
St.  Thomas.  A.  D.  1171,  and  became  so 
odious  to  the  Pope,  "  that  the  Pope  would 
neither  see  nor  hear  the  ambassadors  whom 
he  sent  twice  to  clear  himself  of  the  murder 
of  the  martyr,  Thomas,  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury. But  the  whole  court  of  Rome 
cried  out  to  the  ambassadors,  '  stop,  stop, 
as  if  the  very  name  of  King  Henry,  their 
master,  was  an  abomination  in  the  ears  of 
our  Lord  the  P8pe.  So  our  Lord  the  Pope 
had  immutably  made  up  his  mind,  with  the 
unanimous  consent  of  his  brethren,  to  issue 
a  sentence  of  interdict  on  King  Henry  by 
name,  and  on  his  lands  at  this  side  of  the 
sea,  and  to  confirm  that  which  had  been 
issued  against  the  Bishops." 

But  the  ambassadors  having  sworn  before 
the  Pope  and  the  Consistory,  that  the  king 
would  submit  to  whatever  he  decided  in 
this  matter,  the  Pope  abstained  from  men- 
tioning King  Henry's  name  in  the  sentence, 
which  however  excommunicated  those  who 
aided,  assisted  or  abetted  the  assassination. 

Can  any  man  imagine  that  the  Pope  who 
thus  tacitly  excommunicates  King  Henry, 
would  publicly  load  him  with  his  favors? 
Who  could  expect  a  foreign  nation  to  be 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


133 


brought  under  the  authority  of  the  Pope, 
hy  a  king  who  withdrew  his  own  kingdom 
from  that  same  authority  I  that  he  would 
make  foreigners  observe  a  law  against  which 
he  himself  had  rebelled  1  that  the  seeds  of 
virtue  would  be  planted  in  a  foreign  soil  by 
one  who  profligately  abandoned  himself  to 
vice  at  home  ?  In  truth,  the  king  indulged 
in  loathsome  excesses ;  he  profaned  the 
holiness  of  the  marriage  bed,  by  intercourse 
with  paramours  and  abandoned  women ; 
but,  far  beyond  all  his  excesses  of  this  kind, 
was  his  unchaste  solicitation  some  say,  his 
violation  of  Adela,  sister  to  Philip,  King  of 
France,  and  betrothed  wife  of  his  own  son 
Richard.  Nay,  was  it  not  believed  that, 
after  his  divorce  from  his  lawful  wife,  he 
intended  to  marry  Adelaide,  and  if  he  had 
issue,  to  bastardize  and  disinherit  the  chil- 
dren of  the  former  marriage  !  Certain  it  is, 
that  by  tergiversation  and  negotiation  he 
deferred  so  long  the  marriage  of  his  son 
Richard,  that  the  Frenchman  declared  war 
against  him,  and  that  Richard  conceived 
such  an  aversion  for  Adela,  on  account  of 
that  sinister  suspicion,  that  he  refused  her 
hand,  and  married  Berengaria,  daughter  to 
the  King  of  Navarre.'' 

Moreover,  he  allowed  "  his  kinswoman 
Mary,  daughter  to  King  Stephen,  the  Ab- 
bess of  the  Nuns  of  Ramsey,  to  live  as  wife 
with  Matthew,  Count  of  Boulogne  — a  hor- 
rible precedent  for  posterity."  Oaths  were 
always  on  his  lips.  Nothing  more  common 
than  to  hear  him  swear  "by  the  eyes  of 
God."  He  is  even  charged  with  perjury 
more  than  once,  ''for  having  violated  the 
last  will  of  his  father,  Geoffrey,  to  which  he 
had  sworn,  and  another  oath,  thrice  repeat- 
ed, of  going  to  the  crusades."  *  *  *  * 

The  forger  of  this  Bull  must  have  been 
deranged  when  he  represented  the  Pope 
entrusting  the  moral  reformation  of  any 
nation  to  a  man  blasted  with  such  vices. 
The  Pope  could  not  so  far  forget  himself 
as  to  give  a  remedy  which  would  propagate 
rather  than  cure  the  disease,  and  make  the 
cicatrized  wounds  gape  afresh  more  hideous- 
ly. A  master  of  that  character,  instead  of 
cleansing  the  blemishes  of  those  placed 
under  his  tuition,  would  blacken  them  with 
his  own  hues '  As  well  might  you  entrust 
him  with  the  office  of  moral  reformer  as  fit 
a  saddle  on  an  ox.  ****** 

Would  not  Henry  be  a  fitter  instrument 
for  alienating  the  Irish  from  the  Pontiff, 
and  preventing  them  from  embracing  his 
laws,  than  for  winning  them  over  to  the 
Pope,  and  subduing  them  to  his  authority? 
Had  not  himself  rebelled  against  the  Pope, 
and  tramplrd  on  his  most  solemn  decisions  ? 
Were  his  unparalleled  contumacy  and 
dogyeil  obstinacy  to  be  rewarded,  not  pun- 
ished, by  the  Pops  I  When  the  King  ap- 
plied for  the  honor  of  such  an  office,  well 


may  we  address  him  in  the  words  of  Hora- 
tius: 

"The  courser  asks  a  plough,  the  ox  a  saddle." 
Or  reproach  him  with  Ovidius: 

•'  Phaeton,  great  thy  desire*,  and  far  beyond 
Thy  streugth,  the  office  which  you  seek." 

The  Popes  never  before  commissioned, 
even  persons  who  wore  the  royal  diadem, 
to  reform  the  savage  morals  of  men,  if  they 
were  not  eminent  for  piety  and  virtue  aa 
well  as  for  rank.  And  whoever  undertook 
the  responsibility,  did  not  trust  to  an  army 
to  subdue  the  people  whom  they  were  to 
instruct,  but  used  persuasion  to  conciliate 
them.  Henry's  services  to  the  Church  were 
not  so  signal  as  to  excite  the  Pontiff  to 
grant  him  a  novel  and  unprecedented  favor. 
On  the  contrary,  the  most  rigorous  ecclesi- 
astical penalties  were  inflicted  on  him  for 
his  injuries  to  the  Church,  and  especially  for 
shedding  the  innocent  blood  of  St.  Thomat, 
which  excited  the  indignation  of  the  Pope 
more  than  of  all  the  others.  "For  the  first 
announcement  of  that  murder  struck  such 
deep  and  bitter  grief  into  the  Pope's  heart, 
that  for  eight  days  he  never  spoke  even  to 
his  domestics  ;  and  strictly  ordered  that  no 
Englishmen  should  be  admitted  to  his  pres- 
ence." Henry,  no  doubt,  most  bitterly 
repented  the  perpetration  of  this  murder, 
but  he  does  not  appear  to  have  ever  so  far 
recovered  the  good  graces  of  the  Pope  as  to 
get  a  grant  of  such  extraordinary  import- 
ance. The  Pope  "was  a  prudent  man, 
eloquent,  subtle,  and  profoundly  learned  in 
the  sacred  Scriptures,  and  in  Divine  and 
human  laws.  Very  few  of  his  predecessors 
were  equal  to  him  in  learning,"  according  to 
a  contemporary  author.  Such  a  man, 
knowing  well  that  the  King's  daily  delin- 
quencies must  have  engendered  a  propensity 
to  evil,  would  never  confide  to  him  the  moral 
reformation  of  a  whole  nation. 

Of  all  the  Bishops  of  England,  Thomas 
alone  adhered  to  the  Pope ;  all  consented 
publicly  or  tacitly  to  the  iniquitous  consti- 
tutions of  Henry  against  the  liberty  of  the 
Church.  "So  low  were  they  fallen,  that 
with  the  exception  of  the  Archbishop,  none 
openly  opposed  "  How  could  the  Pope 
find  among  such  Prelates  a  person  fit  to 
bring  any  nation  to  the  head  of  the  Church, 
from  which  they  were  themselves  cut  off  1 

But  an  attempt  .to  bind  the  Irish  more 
firmly  to  the  Pope  was  superfluous,  because 
they  never  separated  from  him.  All  Orders 
in  Ireland,  lay  and  ecclesiastical,  were 
unanimous  in  their  zealous  protestations  of 
obedience,  and  in  all  things  submissive  to 
his  will ;  his  legates  were  promptly,  un- 
reservedly obeyed ;  the  liberties  of  the 
Church  were  extended  and  confirmed  by 
law,  and  the  preservation  of  all  the  rights  oj 
thf  Pope.,  iclide.  ami  entire,  was  the  chief 


134 


THK      POPE      ANI»      IRKLAtfD. 


concern  of  the  nation.  Therefore,  they 
that  are  in  health  need  not  a  physician  but 
they  that  are  ill." 

If  a  lawsuit  arise  regarding  some  little 
estate,  or  any  property,  however  trifling,  a 
judgment  is  never  pronounced  until  both 
the  claimants  come  forward  and  state  their 
arguments,  or,  at  least,  through  their  own 
fault  do  not  appear.  Thia  rule,  invariably 
followed  in  matters  of  minor  interest, 
should  it  be  denied  to  the  Irish  in  the  moat 
momentous  of  all?  Liberty  is  "a  thing 
beyond  all  price,"  the  dearest  treasure  of 
man ;  so  dear,  that  there  is  no  evil,  how- 
ever great,  which  they  would  not  encounter 
to  preserve  it.  Yet  this  judgment  anni- 
hilates the  liberty  of  Irishmen,  who  are  not 
aware  of  their  trial,  nor  even  summoned. 
They  are  doomed  to  be  slaves  in  their  own 
soil,  before  they  are  afforded  an  opportun- 
ity of  confronting  and  refuting  their  ac- 
cusers. War  itself  is  more  just  in  its  rules  ; 
for  an  enemy  sends  a  declaration  of  war 
before  he  draws  the  sword,  and  would  deem 
himself  disgraced  if  slaughter,  burnings, 
devastation,  and  the  other  evils  of  war, 
were  the  first  notification  he  sent  to  his 
surprised  antagonist  to  meet  him  in  the 
field. 

In  this  judicial  proceeding  the  liish  were 
condemned  without  evidence.  For,  contrary 
to  the  law  of  God  and  man,  the  enemy  was 
sole  witness  and  accuser.  "In  the  mouth 
of  two  or  three  witnesses,  every  word  may 
stand  ;"  and  therefore  the  laws  decide  that 
one  witness  is  to  be  valued  as  if  there  were 
no  witnesses.  The  laws  also  exclude  from 
giving  evidence  a  person  of  known  partial- 
ity for  one  party.  But  all,  save  the  wil- 
fully blind,  must  perceive  that  the  author 
of  the  Bull  was  a  partisan  of  his  own  cown- 
trymen,  and  a  furiou*  enemy  to  ours. 

Finally,  every  form  and  principle  of  law 
is  violated  by  this  j  udgment,  which,  by  a 
heinous  injustice,  deprives  the  Irish  of  their 
kingdom,  their  liberty,  and  their  property. 
In  their  case  the  maxims  of  law  and  right 
were  set  aside ;  their  ruin  was  doomed  to 
be  consummated  by  force,  and  could  they 
be  blamed,  if  they  strained  all  the  energies 
of  body  and  soul  t  >  resist  it f  "  Thia  has 
retson  prescribed  to  the  learned,  and  neces- 
sity to  the  barbarians,  and  custom  to  na- 
tions, and  nature  herself  to  the  wild  beast, 
that  they  should  at  all  times,  by  all  means, 
repel  all  violence  from  their  body,  from 
their  head,  from  their  life."  For  when 
argument  is  not  a  sufficient  protection,  there 
can  be  no  injustice  to  appeal  to  arms.  Such 
is  the  express  doctrine  of  Cicero.  "As 
there  are  two  kinds  of  dispute  one  by  argu- 
ment, another  by  force,  and  as  the  former 
is  peculiar  to  man,  the  latter  to  beasts,  we 
must  appeal  to  the  latter  if  we  cannot  use 
the  former.  Ulpianus  also  approves  the 


maxim  of  Cassius,  "  that  it  is  lawful  to  re- 
pel force  by  force,  and  that  the  right  is 
founded  in  nature."  The  same  is  expressed 
by  Ovidius  : 

"  Arms  against  arms  to  take  all  laws  allow." 

These  Bulls,  therefore,  have  no  authority, 
because  "  whatever  is  done,  contrary  to 
law,  ought  to  be  regarded  as  null."  *  *  * 

The  author  of  the  Bull  must  therefore 
have  been  under  some  malignant  influence 
when  he  sent  forth  this  document  as  a 
trumpet  blast  to  inflame  men  to  rage, 
rapine,  conflagration,  devastation,  murder, 
and  the  other  ills  of  war,  and  to  stimulate 
them,  as  Tertullianus  says,  "to  treachery, 
savageness,  injustice,  the  peculiar  business 
of  war."  To  make  war  on  a  people  in 
order  to  give  them  laws,  is  the  same  as  to 
use  inhumanity  and  ferocity  to  produce 
humanity  and  gentleness.  Law  is  silenced 
by  the  clash  of  arms.  Antigonus  senior, 
when  storming  some  cities,  laughed  at  a 
man  who  presented  to  him  a  treatise  on  jus- 
tice, and  Marius  protested  that,  amidst  the 
din  of  War,  he  could  not  hear  the  voice  of 
Law.  Even  Pompeius  himself,  generally  so 
modest,  dared  to  say,  "How  can  I  think  of 
law  while  I  am  in  arms  ?" 

Noble  instruments,  truly,  for  introducing 
virtue  and  more  refined  manners  among  any 
nation.  Henry  II.,  a  man  black  with 
crime,  and  his  armed  followers,  ferocious  by 
nature,  and  by  the  example  of  their  leader  ! 

"  The  morals  of  oar  king  infect  us  all. 
Pliant  as  soldiers  at  the  trumpet's  call." 

If  rank  shoots  of  immorality  disfigured 
the  Irish  character,  they  should  be  lopped 
off  by  the  pruning  knife  of  erudition,  not 
cloven  down  with  the  battle-axes  of  those 
savage  sons  of  Mars. 

The  forger  of  this  Bull,  which  has  been 
put  forth  under  the  name  of  Pope  Alexan- 
der, represents  the  character  of  the  Irish 
in  a  more  horrid  light  than  they  appear  in 
the  Bull  attributed  to  Pope  Adrian.  The 
latter  rather  insinuates  than  directly  asserts 
that  some  Irish  customs  were  barbarous  ; 
the  former  styles  them  "  Christians  in  name, 
1  ut  barbarians  in  reality,"  though  it  is  a 
most  undoubted  fact  that  at  this  very  period 
the  efforts  to  reclaim  and  civilize  them  were 
never  more  zealous  and  successful."  *  *  * 

But  now,  to  set  before  my  reader  what  I 
have  already  frequently  proved,  in  various 
places,  how,  I  ask,  could  that  nation  be 
deficient  in  refinement  of  manners,  where 
there  was  not  a  single  extensive  territory 
that  had  not  several  monasteries,  and  where 
every  respective  monastery  had  at  least  one 
learned  man  publicly  dispensing  the  treas- 
ures of  his  knowledge  ?  Each  cathedral  had 
its  school  open  to  all  who  wished  to  avail 
themselves  of  it  ;  at  this  day  there  are 
thirty-one  such  churches  in  Ireland,  and 


THE      POfrE      AND      IRELAN*. 


135 


formerly  the  number  was  much  greater. 
Moreover,  there  was  at  all  times  an  im- 
mense concourse  of  scholars  to  the  Univers- 
ity of  Ardmacha,  and  so  great  was  it  at  one 
period,  according  to  Florence  McCarthy, 
that  they  reached  the  number  of  7,000. 

Thus  we  need  not  found  the  glory  of 
Ireland  exclusively  on  her  primitive  ages, 
"  when  she  was  the  rich  and  verdant  land 
of  scholars — when  her  pastures,  if  I  may  so 
speak,  were  gemmed  with  the  living  flowers 
of  learning,  thick  as  the  starry  coruscations 
of  the  twinkling  orbs  around  the  pole  !  !  1" 
Whence  Eadfrid  "imbibed  Ambrosia; 
where  three  times,  in  the  course  of  about 
two  years,  he  drank  of  the  rich  cream  of 
wisdom,  and  feasted  on  the  gemmed  honey- 
comb of  Irish  learning  :  for  great  crowds 
and  fleets  of  Britons  went  over  to  Ireland," 
as  Adelm  testifies  in  his  letter  to  Eadfrid, 
the  13th  in  Ussher's  Sylloge.  Camden, 
page  730,  adopts  their  authority :  "In 
those  days,"  he  says,  "our  Anglo-Saxons 


flocked  from  all  sides  to  Ireland  as  the  mart 
of  useful  learning.  Hence  nothing  is  more 
common  in  our  histories  of  the  lives  of  holy 
men  than  "  he  was  sent  to  Ireland  for  hia 
education."  And  in  the  life  of  Sulgen,  who 
flourished  600  years  ago,  we  read,  "  In- 
spired with  a  love  for  study,  he  went,  after 
the  example  of  his  fathers,  to  the  Irish,  eo 
il.ustrious  for  their  wonderful  learning. 
From  the  Irish,  the  old  English,  our  an- 
cestors appear  to  have  derived  the  form  of 
our  letters,  which  are  the  very  same  as 
those  used  in  Ireland  at  the  present  day. 
Thus  was  Ireland  abundantly  stocked  with 
eminent  saints  and  brilliant  scholars,  at  a 
time  when  the  culture  of  useful  learning 
was  neglected  and  unknown  throughout  the 
Christian  world."  May  we  not  justly  apply 
to  Ireland  the  lines  of  Buchanan  : 

•'  Thither,  when  war  convulsed  the  Roman  world, 
The  muses  in  their  flight  their  wings  unfurled: 
Their  only  home  ;  whence  to  the  shores  of  Gaul 
Doctors  and  learned  guides  of  youth  r*-ctll 
The  oracles  of  Greek  and  Latin  lore," 


CHAPTER    XXIV. 


Further  Extracts  from  Father  Lynch's  "Cambrensis  Eversus." — Ireland  Always  Loyal 
to  Borne— Additional  Testimony  proving  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls  to 
be  Entirely  Spurious. 


In  his  great  work,  "Cambrensis  Eversus," 
Dr.  Lynch  makes  the  following  important 
allusion  to  the  forcible  historical  fact  that 
— unlike  England  — Ireland  never  revolted 
against  the  dogmas  of  the  Church  or  op- 
posed the  lawful  Pontiff  of  Borne.  On  this 
point  Dr.  Lynch  says  : 

"But  let  me  resume  once  more  the  train 
of  my  argument.  England  has  revolted 
more  than  once  to  anti-  Popes  ;  Ireland  has 
always  faithfully  clung  to  the  true  Pope 
In  England  the  clergy  were  sullied  with  the 
loathsome  stain  of  impurity  ;  in  Ireland 
they  were  pre-eminently  distinguished  for 
chastity.  In  England  ecclesiastical  dis- 
cipline was  shaken  by  the  violent  dissen- 
sions of  the  Bishops  amongst  themselves, 
and  their  disobedience  to  the  higher  au- 
thority, which  compelled  St.  Thomas  to 
launch  against  them  the  anathemas  of  the 
Church;  but  in  Ireland  the  discipline  of 
the  Church  was  strictly  observed,  the  sec- 
ond order  of  the  clergy  assiduously  attend- 
ing the  churches,  both  in  reciting  the  divine 
offices,  and  observing  the  most  rigid  abstin- 
ence, while  the  Bishops  held  numerous 
synods,  meeting  and  consulting  together  on 
the  canons  most  conducive  to  the  spiritual 


interests  of  their  flocks,  but  never  deciding 
on  the  affairs  of  greater  moment  without 
the  authority  of  the  Legate.  To  him,  if  to 
any  man,  must  be  attributed  the  refinement 
of  morals  which  was  wrought  in  Ireland, 
and  not  to  King  Henry,  whom  Cambren&is 
flatters  in  the  following  strain  :  "  He  was 
appointed  by  Heaven,  King  and  Lord  of 
Ireland.  To  that  glorious  King,  the  Church 
and  kingdom  of  Ireland  owe  whatever  peace 
or  religious  improvement  they  have  yet  en- 
joyed. For,  before  his  arrival  in  Ireland, 
multifarious  evils  had  constantly  luxuriated 
there  in  all  ages  back,  until  his  power  and 
agency  extirpated  them  for  ever." 

One  would  imagine,  heaven  save  us,  that 
this  Henry  was  a  god  that  dropped  down 
from  the  clouds,  with  a  "  divine"  commis- 
sion, to  reform  the  morals  of  Ireland  by 
the  mere  breath  of  his  spirit,  and  to  fight 
the  battles  of  the  Lord  like  another  Gideon 
or  Baruc,  or  Sampson,  or  Jeptha,  or  David, 
or  Samuel,  or  the  Machabees.  But  Gir- 
aldus  must  allow  us  to  remark,  among  a 
great  many  others,  one  very  striking  diftVr- 
ence  between  Henry  and  these  holy  mtn  ; 
that  they  "by  faith  conquered  kingdoms," 
while  he  attempted  to  subdue  Ireland  by 
"the  force  of  his  own  arm."  They,  placing 
their  confidence  in  God  alone,  believed 


136 


THE       POI'E       AND      IltELAND. 


"  that  the  success  of  war  is  not  in  the  multi- 
tude of  the  army,  but  strength  cometh  from 
heaven."  He,  relying  on  his  own  strength, 
burst  upon  Ireland  with  the  whole  weight 
of  his  power :  he  landed  in  Ireland  with 
4<Xi  Urge  ships,  freighted  with  warlike  men, 
and  horses,  and  arms,  and  provisions — an 
estimate  which  is  given  by  Walter  of  Cov- 
entry, not  in  numerals,  but  in  express 
words,  "the  King,"  he  says,  "went  with 
f»ur  hundred  ships,  full  of  armed  men,  to 
Ireland." 

Nothing  but  loathsome  flattery  could 
have  extolled,  beyond  all  measure,  and  at- 
tributed even  to  God  himself,  an  enterprise 
reeking  with  such  ferocity  ;  "  but  flatterers 
f.'rget  even  the  common  meaning  of  words  ; 
make  a  present  of  another  man's  goods,  it 
is  liberality  ;  be  obstinate  in  wickedness,  it 
is  fortitude."  In  the  same  way,  cowards, 
and  loons,  and  misers,  and  wicked  men  of 
all  sorts,  are  metamorphosed  into  heroes, 
and  great  souls,  and  generous  hearts,  and 
models  of  all  virtue.  So  far  from  having  a 
commission  from  heaven  to  oppress  Ireland, 
lie  had  none  even  from  earth — that  is,  no 
human  power  had  given  to  him  any  extra- 
ordinary authority  to  make  war  upon  Ire- 
land. That  spurious  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian 
never  saw  the  light,  until  it  was  shown  to 
the  Irish  in  the  synod  of  Waterford  many 
years  after  its  supposed  date,  and,  according 
t«>  the  English  writers  themselves,  Henry 
ha<l  invaded  Ireland  before  he  obtained  the 
Bull  from  Pope  Alexander. 

Both  Bulls,  I  contend,  must  be  pro- 
nounced spurious,  for  many  reasons;  but 
above  all,  because  they  condemned  the 
Irish  without  a  hearing,  to  forfeit  their 
liberty  and  the  homes  of  their  fathers.  No 
mortal  man  has  a  right  to  condemn  any 
one  without  a  hearing  :  the  law  of  nature 
declares,  "that  innocence,  if  brought  to 
trial,  can  be  acquitted,  but  that  guilt  can- 
not be  condemned  without  a  trial."  God 
himself  appears  to  have  revealed  that  law, 
for,  when  Adam  and  Eve  had  committed  a 
manifest  crime,  He  did  not  condemn  them 
unheard.  Neither  did  he  wish  to  punish 
severely  the  notorious  horrors  of  the  in- 
habitants of  Gomorrah,  until  he  had  wit- 
nessed them  himself'.  "  For,"  he  says, 
"  the  cry  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  is 
multiplied,  and  their  sin  has  become  ex- 
ceedingly grievous.  I  will  go  down  and  see 
whether  they  have  done  according  to  the 
cry  that  is  come  to  me,  or  whether  it  be 
not  so,  that  I  may  know."  Hence  the  first 
admonition  of  the  Council  of  Lateran  to 
judges  is  that  they  should  not  hastily  heark- 
en to  accusations,  but  that  after  the 
example  of  God  Himself,  they  should  care- 
fully examine  them,  before  they  pronounce 
the  doom  of  the  accused. 

When  the  Pope  had  resolved  tc  introduce 


solid  reformation  into  Ireland,  could  he 
have  so  far  forgotten  the  rules  of  pru- 
dence as  to  entrust  the  establishment  of 
religious  rites  to  a  layman,  rather  than  to 
some  member  of  the  ecclesiastical  body 
whom  he  could  select  for  the  task  ?  Is  the 
helm  of  the  ship  entrusted  to  a  ploughman, 
or  the  plough  to  the  cobbler  ?  No,  let  all 
men  work  at  their  own  trade.  It  is  the 
excellent  advice  of  Horatius  : 

"  The  landsman   fears  the    helm    to    guide ; 

health's  rules 
Phytfcians  teach  ;  each  trade  knows  its  own 

tools." 

He,  forsooth,  is  to  prescribe  the  best 
rules  for  celebrating  or  hearing  Mass, 
"  who,  even  during  the  short  hour  of  the 
Sacrifice  of  the  Sacred  Host,  was  so  op- 
pressed by  cares  of  state  and  of  his  crown, 
that  even  that  short  time  was  spent  more 
in  conversation  and  deliberation  than  in 
devotion."  Surely,  he  was  not  sufficiently 
grounded  in  piety  to  undertake  the  re- 
ligious reformation  of  others.  I  have  clear- 
ly proved  that  he  was  so  deeply  tainted 
with  vice,  that  you  might  as  well  expect 
to  gather  grapes  from  thorns,  or  figs  from 
briars,  as  learn  virtue  from  him.  It  is  not 
my  intention  now  to  return  to  that  subject, 
because  stale  repetition  is  always  disagree- 
able. But  if  the  Irish  were  delivered  over 
to  his  care  to  be  cleansed  from  their  iniqui- 
ties, it  would  be,  to  use  a  common  saying, 
only  throwing  them  from  the  limekiln  into 
the  coalpit. 

There  is  no  cleansing  Giraldus  from  the 
guilt  of  flattery,  when  he  said,  "  that  the 
Church  of  Ireland  owed  to  Henry  alone 
whatever  perfection  it  had  attained."  But 
more  outrageous  still  was  his  assertion, 
'•  that  whatever  peace  Ireland  enjoyed  waa 
to  be  attributed  to  that  King  ;"  for,  what 
is  this  but  to  say  plainly  that  a  man  who 
convulsed  a  kingdom  by  the  blast,  or  rather 
the  tempests  of  war,  had  breathed  over  it 
the  gentle  zephyrs  of  peace.  May  we  not 
apply  here,  with  strict  propriety,  the  words 
of  Isaias  :  "  Woe  to  you  that  call  evil  good, 
and  good  evil  ;  that  put  darkness  for  light, 
and  light  for  darkness  ;  that  put  bitter  for 
sweet,  and  sweet  for  bitter."  Such  is  the 
natural  bent  of  flatterers,  to  call  the  scoffer 
an  agreeable  man  ;  the  obscene  talker,  a 
jovial  companion  ;  the  hot-tempered,  brave; 
the  miser,  an  economist ;  the  spendthrift, 
munificent ;  the  obstinate,  persevering ;  in 
a  word,  dazzled  by  the  false  lustre  of  evil 
deeds,  they  veil  their  hideousness  under 
the  name  of  v  rtues.  Though  Henry  were 
admirably  qualified  in  every  other  respect, 
to  confer  on  Ireland  such  vast  blessings, 
both  in  religion  and  in  peace,  he  had  neith- 
er time  nor  leisure  for  the  work,  as  he  spent 
no  more  than  six  months  in  Ireland,  and 
was  employed  more  in  evoking  ferocious 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


137 


passions  by  his  arms,  than  in  instructing  the 
nation. 

For  Diarmuid,  King  of  Leinster,  being 
guilty  of  adultery  and  rebellion,  the  Irish, 
in  order  to  enforce  the  legal  penalties  of 
those  crimes,  took  up  arms  against  him, 
when  all  other  means  of  repressing  his 
audacity  had  failed.  King  Henry  then 
came  forward  as  the  determined  patron  of 
adultery  and  rebellion,  and  did  not  only  not 
crush  the  insolence  of  a  man  who  trampled 
on  the  laws  and  spurned  his  lawful  superi- 
ors, but  even  goaded  him  on  in  his  career 
of  vice  by  sending  an  army  to  his  support. 
Is  it  not,  then,  plain  that  Henry  inculcated 
no  virtue  in  Ireland,  but  rather  sowed  vice 
broadcast ;  he  established  no  new  laws,  but 
labored  with  all  his  might  to  abolish  the 
good  old  laws  of  the  land.  Truly,  it  amazes 
me,  that  any  man  could  have  ever  imagined 
Henry  had  the  Pope's  authority  for  such 
proceedings. 

Though  the  proofs  already  advanced  are 
more  than  sufficient  to  show  that  the  Bulls 
of  Adrian  and  Alexander  are  spurious, 
there  remains  yet  one  argument,  which,  in 
my  humble  judgment,  places  the  question 
beyond  the  possibility  of  doubt.  "  Now 
John  De  Courcey,"  says  Newbrigensis, 
gathering  a  valiant  band  of  horse  and  foot, 
resolved  to  invade  the  province  of  Ireland, 
which  was  separated  from  Scotland  by  a 
narrow  channel,  and  is  called  Ulster.  But 
it  so  happened  that  Vivian,  a  very  eloquent 
man,  and  Degate  of  the  Apostolic  See,  had 
landed  there  from  Scotland,  and  was  re- 
ceived with  every  mark  of  respect,  by  the 
Kings  and  Bishops  of  that  province.  While 
he  was  stopping  at  Dun  (Down),  a  city  on 
the  sea  shore,  news  came  to  the  Irish  of 
the  advance  of  the  hostile  army.  They 
consulted  the  Legate  as  to  what  they  should 
do  in  such  a  conjuncture,  and  he  told  them 
that  they  should  fight  for  their  country, 
and  he  gave  them  his  blessing  with  hearty 
prayers  for  their  success."  But  they  were 
defeated,  "  and  the  city  of  Dun  was  taken." 
The  Roman  Legate,  with  his  attendants, 
took  refuge  in  a  church  that  was  famed  for 
its  relics  of  the  saints  ;  for  he  was  a  prudent 
man,  and  had  procured  letters  from  the 
King  of  the  English  to  his  governors  in  Ire- 
land, to  aid  him  by  their  authority  in  the 
discharge  of  his  legatine  functions  among 
the  barbarians.  On  the  security  of  those 
letters  he  passed  unmolested  to  Dublin,  and 
by  virtue  of  a  commission,  either  from  the 
King  of  England  or  our  Lord  the  Pope,  he 
held  a  general  council  of  the  Irish  Bishops 
and  Abbots.  But  wishing  to  enforce  too 
violently  the  observance  of  Roman  custom, 
in  a  church  of  barbarian  simplicity,  the 
King's  governors  ordered  him  either  to  de- 
part or  to  take  part  with  them  in  the  war. 
He  did  depart,  loaded  with  Irish  gold, 


which  had  been  the  grand   object  of  his 
wishes  " 

Can  any  man  imagine  that  such  a  minis- 
ter either  knew  not  or  despised  the  orders 
of  his  master  ?  Would  he  have  come  to 
Ireland  without  the  order  of  the  Pope,  and 
utterly  ignorant  of  the  duties  he  was  bound 
to  inculcate  among  the  Irish  ?  If  the  Pope 
had  appointed  Henry  Lord  of  Ireland,  as 
the  Papal  Letter  had  ordered  the  Irish  to 
obey  Henry,  why  were  not  the  Irish  ordered 
to  obey  the  words  of  his  Legate,  especially 
as  Cardinal  Vivian  was  the  first  Papal 
Legate  that  came  to  Ireland  after  the  su- 
preme dominion  of  Ireland  had  been  con- 
ferred OP.  Henry  by  the  Pope.  It  was 
notorious  that  the  Irish  not  only  did  not 
acknowledge,  but  opposed  by  arms,  Henry's 
claims  to  their  kingdom  ;  and  hence  the 
principal  duty  of  the  Legate  should  have 
been  to  produce  the  Pope's  Bull,  and  to  re- 
strain them  within  the  bounds  of  duty,  and 
curb  their  impetuosity  by  his  exhortations. 
If  the  short  interval  of  five  years  from  the 
supposed  Papal  grant  of  the  Crown  of  Ire- 
land to  King  Henry  had  obliterated  the 
Bull  from  his  memory,  it  is  amazing  that 
the  strife  of  arms  did  not  rouse  him  from 
his  lethargy  and  remind  him  of  that  im- 
portant document.  Would  uot  so  singular 
and  unprecedented  a  power,  conferred  on  a 
foreign  prince  without  the  knowledge  of  the 
victims  themselves,  challenge  attention  and 
excite  wonder  1  This  fact  alone  proves  to 
demonstration  that  the  Bull  never  existed  ; 
it  was  not  produced  at  a  conjuncture  when 
there  was  not  only  occasion  but  even  neces- 
sity forit ;  does  the  soldier  let  his  sword  rust 
in  the  scabbard  when  the  army  is  on  him? 
******** 

At  all  events,  it  is  certain  that  King 
Henry  either  did  not  believe  in  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  Bulls  of  Adrian  and  Alexander, 
or  the  validity  of  the  claim  which  they  pur- 
ported to  give  to  the  sovereignty  of  Ireland. 
For  we  find  him  distrusting  them,  and 
laboring  to  extort  from  Pope  Lucius,  the 
Third,  successor  of  Alexander,  a  grant  simi- 
lar to  the  preceding.  Yet,  though  he  had 
deserved  well  of  Pope  Lucius,  and  sent  him 
a  large  sum  of  money  in  1188,  he  was  dis- 
appointed in  his  expectations.  The  Pope 
refused  the  request,  probabiy,  as  well  as  we 
can  conjecture,  because,  after  an  attentive 
examination  of  the  whole  affair,  he  discov- 
ered either  that  the  Bulls  had  never  been 
issued  or  that  they  were  fraudulently  ob- 
tained. Hence  we  find  Henry  still  restless, 
from  the  conviction,  perhaps,  that  the  pre- 
ceding Bulls  had  been  unjustly  procured, 
and  were  therefore  invalid.  Again,  he 
applies  to  Urban  III.,  the  successor  of  Pope 
Lucius,  and  begs  a  new  grant  of  the  king- 
dom of  Ireland.  In  the  year  1185,  Henry, 
King  of  England,  sent  his  ambassadors  tg 


138 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


Urban  and  obtained  many  favors,  which  had 
been  sternly  refused  by  Pope  Lucius.  One 
of  the  concessions  was  that  he  was  em- 
powered to  have  any  of  his  sons  crowned 
King  of  Ireland,  and  the  Pope  confirmed 
that  right  to  him  by  a  Bull,  and  sent  to 
him,  as  a  token  of  his  will  and  approbation, 
a  crown  of  peacock  feathers  wreathed  with 
gold."  As  merchants  of  slender  means  can- 
not get  goods  on  credit,  but  must  pay  down 
ready  money,  even  so  this  writer  has  no 
more  claims  to  the  assent  of  his  readers 
than  what  his  authorities  can  command. 
Would  it,  I  ask,  have  been  more  trouble- 
some to  give  a  copy  of  that  Bull  than  to 
make  this  passing  notice  of  it  ?  Can  there 
be  any  possible  reason  for  suppressing  it, 
but  the  conviction  that  it  had  not  really 
been  granted  by  the  Pope  ?  In  the  first 
year  of  his  pontificate,  before  he  was  under 
the  least  obligation  to  Henry,  could  Urban 
be  so  indecorous,  so  flexible,  as  to  grant 
thus  readily  what  neither  the  most  pressing 
solicitation  nor  the  choicest  favors  could 
extract  from  his  predecessor?  Surely  he 
could  not  take  such  liberty  with  the  prop- 
erty of  others,  as  to  make  a  present  of  a 
whole  kingdom  to  a  foreigner,  without  even 
communicating  his  designs  to  the  inhabi- 
tants or  hearing  their  defense.  Surely  he 
would  send  some  more  respectable  pledge 
of  his  liberality  than  a  hunting  cap  of  pea- 
cock's feathers,  which  would  gird,  with  more 
propriety,  the  temples  of  some  stage  king 
in  a  theatre,  than  the  head  of  a  true  and 
real  monarch. 

But  what  is  the  substance  of  this  grant 
of  the  Pope  ?  Henry  is  authorized  to  select 
any  of  his  sons  and  have  him  crowned  King 
of  Ireland.  Now  the  author  himself  as- 
sures us  that  Henry  had  already  actually 
usurped  that  power.  In  the  year  1177, 
"  the  King  came  to  Oxford,  and  in  a  gen- 
eral assembly  appointed  his  son  John  King 
of  Ireland,  with  permission  and  authority 
of  Pope  Alexander."  When  the  business 
was  concluded,  it  was  an  odd  time  to  ask 
permission  to  have  it  done.  It  was  a  mock- 
ery of  authority.  But  such  was  Henry's 
habit,  first  to  seize  upon  a  territory  and 
then  to  beg  a  grant  of  the  same  from  the 
Pope.  Thus  he  lands  in  Ireland  at  the 
head  of  an  army,  before  he  published  the 
Bull  of  Adrian,  or  obtained  the  Bull  of 
Alexander;  proceeding  in  an  inverted 
order,  beginning  where  he  should  end. 
When  war  is  over,  succor  is  too  late  and 
useless  ;  when  a  possession  is  secured,  a 
grant  of  it  is  needless,  a  petition  for  the 
grant  is  a  mockery.  What  crime  more  re- 
volting than  to  make  another  man  bear  the 
infamy  of  your  crime  while  you  enjoy  its 
fruit?  To  ask  another  to  staunch  the 
wound  which  your  own  hands  have  torn 
open,  and  load  him  with  the  execration  due 
to  your  own  guilt  ? 


One  of  the  most  powerful  arguments, 
perhaps,  against  the  authenticity  of  these 
Bulls  of  Adrian  and  Alexander  is,  that  the 
editors,  who  have  used  all  possible  diligence 
to  give  a  complete  edition  of  the  Bulls, 
pisned  them  over  with  contempt,  and  n'.ver 
inserted  them  in  their  collections.  They 
could  not  dream  of  registering  such  spurious 
bantlings,  so  unbecoming  the  solemn  dig- 
nity of  the  Pope  among  the  legitimate 
emanations  from  the  Apostolical  See. 
These  editors  were  like  the  eagles  which 
are  said  to  know  their  young  by  the  follow- 
ing ordeal :  The  parent  bird  takes  the 
fledgling  in  its  talons  and  holds  it  against 
the  rays  of  the  sun.  If  the  eaglet  gazes  at 
it  steadily  it  is  acknowledged  legitimate, 
but  if  the  eye  blenches,  "  the  talon  opens 
and  the  spurious  pretender  is  dropped  to 
the  earth."  Another  excellent  reason  for 
doubting  the  authenticity  of  the  same  Bulls, 
is  the  confession  of  Giraldus  himself,  who 
appears  to  doubt  their  validity,  by  intro- 
ducing other  princes  to  make  good  by  their 
assent  the  Papal  grant  of  the  sovereignty  of 
Ireland  to  Henry  II..  "  There  was,  more- 
over," he  falsely  says,  "  the  authoritative 
sanction  of  the  Popes  and  of  all  the  princes 
and  primates  of  Christendom."  Thus  the 
power  of  giving  a  ruler  to  Ireland,  which 
Giraldus  had  at  first  represented  as  the  ex- 
clusive prerogative  of  the  Pope,  is  now 
divided  among  the  emperor  and  foreign 
kings  and  primates.  Wretched,  indeed, 
must  have  been  the  condition  of  the  Irish, 
who  had  as  many  masters  to  obey  as  there 
were  princes  and  primates  in  Europe, 
though  ''no  man  can  serve  two  masters, 
for  he  will  either  hate  the  one  and  love  the 
other,  or  sustain  the  one  and  despise  the 
other." 

But  what  friendship  could  foreign  princes 
have  for  Henry  when  his  own  sons  hated 
and  took  up  arms  against  him,  and  if  they 
had  no  friendship  for  him  how  could  they 
delegate  to  him  their  authority  over  Ire- 
land ?  I  am  at  loss  to  know  what  induce- 
ments primates  could  have  to  bestow  any 
favor  on  a  man  who  had  murdered  one  of 
their  own  Order,  the  primate  of  England, 
St.  Thomas,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 
Could  foreigners  expect  favors  from  him 
who  was  savagely  cruel  to  his  countrymen  ? 
It  was  a  silly  dream  of  Giraldus  to  give  so 
many  colleagues  to  the  Pope  in  the  supreme 
dominion  of  Ireland.  The  greater  the 
number  of  colleagues  in  that  supreme  do- 
minion the  less  the  power  of  the  Pope, 
because  the  princes  and  primates  of  all 
Christendom  are  represented  as  coequal  in 
power  to  the  Pope  in  disposing  of  the  sov- 
ereignty of  Ireland.  Nay,  this  very  at- 
tempt to  strengthen  Henry's  authority  over 
Ireland  utterly  destroys  it,  for  as  the  princes 
or  primates  never  claimed  the  least  power 


THE      POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


139 


over    Ireland,    their    colleague    the    Pope 
ought  not  to  have  assumed  it. 

But  I  ask,  in  the  first  place,  did  these 
princes  and  primates  of  all  Christendom 
assemble  in  general  conclave  to  make  a 
present  of  the  kingdom  of  Ireland  to  King 
Henry  ?  Or  were  they  solicited  individual- 
ly to  ratify  this  grant  to  King  Henry  ? 
Synodical  act,  or  private  letters  of  the  kind 
I  have  never  been  able  to  discover,  and  the 
word  of  Giraldus,  if  not  supported  by  au- 
thorities, is  not  a  very  safe  ground  of  cer- 
tainty. Moreover,  Maurice  Regan,  retainer 
and  interpreter  of  Diarmaid,  King  of  Lein- 
ster,  who  first  brought  the  English  to 
Ireland,  has  left  us  a  detailed  account  of 
the  events  of  his  own  time,  but  never  makes 
any  allusion  to  those  supposed  bulls  of 
Adrian  and  Alexander.  Now,  a  man  of 
ordinary  judgment  must  find  it  very  diffi- 
cult to  believe  that  a  writer  who  has  given 
minute  details  of  comparatively  trifling  mat- 
ters would  have  passed  over  in  silence  an 
affair  of  momentous  interest,  when  the  in- 
trinsic importance  of  the  documents  and 
even  the  very  names  of  the  Popes  should 
have  been  a  powerful  inducement  to  bring 
their  bulls  from  their  obscurity  into  the 
light  of  day.  Such  documents  could  not 
escape  the  notice  of  a  writer  even  of  or- 
dinary diligence,  who  undertook  to  record 
the  current  events  of  Irish  history. 

The  forgery  of  the  two  Bulls  was  consider- 
ably facilitated  by  the  previous  exploits  of 
others  in  the  same  work  of  deception. 
Thus,  the  Bull  of  Pope  Honorius,  purport- 
ing to  be  a  grant  made  to  Cambridge,  is 
considered  by  many  to  be  apocryphal. 
Harpsfield  gives  the  following  opinion  re- 
garding it :  "  Without  presuming  to  pro- 
nounce a  positive  decision,  or  dispu'e  the 
wiser  judgment  of  others,  I  cannct  extricate 
myself  fully  from  doubts  of  various  kinds, 
arising  from  chronological  difficulties.  It  is, 


if  not  impossible,  at  least  exceedingly  diffi- 
cult to  reconcile  these  statements,  with  a 
history  of  undoubted  authority,  and  com- 
posed nearly  at  the  same  time  by  the  ven- 
erable Beda,  who  states  that  after  this 
period  a  school  for  boys  was  founded  by 
Sigebert  at  Etst  Anglia  on  the  Kentish 
model,  and  that  masters  and  professors 
were  brought  there  from  Kent ;  but  above 
all,  I  cannot  reconcile  it  with  the  chronology 
and  events  of  the  r«ign  of  Honorius.  For, 
can  any  one  believe  that  theological  studies 
were  so  flourishing,  or  that  either  Arch- 
bishops or  Bishops  had  any  authority  in  a 
territory  then  governed  by  Pagan  Saxons? 
Or  that  Honorius  himself  and  the  said  son 
of  Petronius,  of  consular  rank,  could  have 
studied  in  Cambridge  in  those  days  ?  I 
need  not  observe,  moreover,  that  the  words, 
"  when  I  was  in  the  University  in  minor 
orders,  were,  if  I  do  not  mistake,  unknown 
in  that  sense  during  that  century.  I  omit 
other  questions  which  perplex  me  on  this 
intricate  and  slippery  topic.  Others  I  fer- 
vently hope  may  at  length,  perhaps  suc- 
ceed, in  clearing  them  up."  This  Bull  is 
published  in  the  "Antiquities  of  Cam- 
bridge" (lib.  1,  p.  75);  but  it  is  impugned 
by  Brienne  Twine  and  completely  refuted. 
The  Bulls  of  Eugene  IV.  and  Sergius  I.  to 
the  same  Cambridge  are  admitted  to  be 
spurious  also.  Twine  refutes  both  of  them. 
Speiman  also  proves,  conclusively,  that  a 
Bull  purporting  to  be  a  grant  of  certain 
privileges  to  the  monks  of  Canterbury,  by 
St.  Augustine  of  Canterbury,  is  spurious. 
Again,  Gervase,  at  the  year  1181,  writes 
"  that  the  Augustinian  monks  brought  for- 
ward several  rare  and  suspicious  docu- 
ments." Thus,  if  the  author  of  the  forged 
Bulls  of  Adrian  and  Alexander  can  be  de- 
fended by  precedent,  it  were  easy  to  collect 
and  scrape  together  a  great  number  of 
forged  and  surreptitious  Bulls,  to  mitigate, 
in  some  measure,  the  pain  of  his  guilt. 


THK       POPE       AM)       11(1  I. AM). 


CHAPTER    XXV. 

Profound  Reverence  of  the  Irish  People   for    the    Vicar   of    Christ.  —  Nearly    Every 
Nation  in  Europe  placed  under  the  Ban    of    the  Chur  h  except  Ireland. 


In  continuing  his  argument  in  order  to 
I 'iove  the  spurious  character  of  the  Adrian 
and  Alexander  Bulls,  Dr.  Lynch  thus 
brings  forth  the  stern  fact  that  so  far  from 
Ireland  being  in  a  state  of  insubordination 
alluded  to  by  the  fictitious  Bull  attributed 
to  Pope  Alexander  III.,  that  Island  of 
Saints  was  the  only  nation  in  Europe  which 
was  faithful  to  the  Holy  Father  and  loyal 
to  the  Catholic  faith  in  the  dark  days  which 
tried  men's  souls  : 

It  has  ever  been  the  custom  of  Holy 
Mother  Church  to  admonish  her  offending 
children  before  she  subjects  them  to  any 
severe  penalty,  and  to  endeavor  to  deter 
them  by  threats  from  the  commission  of 
crime,  before  she  applied  severe  remedies. 
Thus  Adrian  II.  threatened  Charles  the 
Bald  with  excommunication  for  attempting 
to  deprive  Louis,  son  of  the  deceased  Em- 
peror Lothaire,  of  his  crown ;  and  in  the 
same  way  John  VII.  threatened  Charles  the 
Fat,  if  he  did  not  restore  the  property  of  a 
certain  monastery.  When  Alphonsus,  King 
of  Spain,  was  about  to  marry  the  relation  of 
his  wife,  Gregorius  VII.  ordered  a  threat  of 
excommunication  to  be  pronounced  against 
him,  Many  similar  examples  of  the  lenity 
of  Popes  in  punishing  the  guilty  could  be 
produced,  but  I  omit  them  at  present  for 
brevity's  sake. 

Is  it  possible  that  ao  kind  a  mother  would 
have  departed  from  her  constant  course  of 
mercy  to  crush  Ireland  by  her  severity,  and 
involve  the  innocent  in  ruin,  without  the 
slightest  intimation  of  the  impending  woes  ? 
The  horrors  of  the  punishment  would  press 
heavily  on  Ireland  if  she  had  been  openly 
convicted  of  some  heinous  crimes.  The 
just  punishment  of  crime  must  be  borne 
with  cheerfulness  and  fortitude. 

"  Pain  on  the  guiltless  to  inflict  is  pain." 

But  how  excruciating  must  have  been  the 
agony  of  being  condemned,  absent  and  un- 
heard, when  the  Roman  laws  themselves 
enacted  that  no  sentence  should  be  pro- 
nounced on  any  person  in  his  absence,  and 
that  if  pronounced  it  should  be  invalid. 
The  senate  even  decreed  that  no  judgment 
should  be  pronounced  on  King  Phillippus  in 
his  absence.  In  fine,  St.  Augustinus  re- 
proves Secundus,  Primate  of  Tigisitan,  for 


not  preventing  persons  from  being  con- 
demned in  their  absence. 

That  Ireland  was  never  degraded  by 
crimes  of  an  atrocious  die  appears  from  this 
single  fact,  that  while  all  other  Catholic 
kingdoms  were,  at  some  time  or  other,  laid 
under  excommunication  or  interdict  by  the 
Pope,  according  to  the  nature  of  their 
offences,  Ireland  alone  never  incurred  his 
ecclesiastical  censures. 

Let  us  begin  with  Scotland,  as  it  is  the 
nearest  neighbor  of  Ireland.  In  the  year 
1186,  William,  King  of  Scotland,  obstinate- 
ly opposed  Pope  Alexander  HI.,  by  not 
only  preventing  John,  the  lawfully  appoint- 
ed Bishop  of  St.  Andrews,  from  taking  pos- 
session of  his  See,  but  even  by  expelling 
him  from  his  kingdom.  He  appointed  his 
own  chaplain,  Hugh,  and  then  placed  him 
by  force  of  arms  in  the  See  of  St.  Andrews, 
whereby  the  Pope  was  so  deeply  offended 
that  he  excommun;cated  the  King  aiid  laid 
his  kingdom  under  an  interdict.  Again,  in 
the  year  1216,  "  Swalo,  the  Pope's  legate, 
launched  the  final  bolts  of  the  Church 
against  Alexander  II.,  and  laid  the  king- 
dom of  Scotland  under  interdict  until  the 
injuries  inflicted  on  England  were  repaired, 
and  Carlisle  restored  to  the  English,  from 
whom  it  had  lately  been  taken.1  In  the 
year  1318,  "the  Cardinal  legates  fulmina- 
ted the  thunders  of  the  Church  against 
Robert,  King  of  Scotland,  and  laid  his 
whole  kingdom  under  interdict,  because  he 
violated  his  treaties  and  waged  forbidden 
war  against  Edward,  King  of  England." 

Passing  now  to  England,  we  find  it  more 
than  once  visited  with  the  same  punishment. 
"  Thus,  about  the  year  905,  the  Roman 
Pontiff  laid  an  interdict  on  Edward  the 
Elder,  on  account  of  some  flagrant  dis- 
orders in  ecclesiastical  discipline  in  the 
western  parts  of  the  kingdom.  And  Eugen- 
ius  III.,  quashing  every  obstacle  from  ap- 
peal, ordered  the  sentence  of  interdict  to  be 
pronounced,  by  the  authority  of  the  Pope, 
on  the  land  of  King  Stephen."  Innocent 
III.  visited  King  John  with  a  similar  pun- 
ishment, so  that  all  England  was  under  an 
interdict  during  six  years  and  fourteen 
weeks,  the  conventual  churches  alone  being 
allowed  to  have  the  sacred  mysteries  cele- 
brated once  only  in  the  week,  and  even 
then  with  doors  closet.  During  that  time 
"  the  bodies  of  the  degd  were  carried  out 


THE     POPE     AND     IRELAND. 


141 


from  the  cities  and  towns  and  buried  like 
dogs  in  the  hye-ways  and  ditches,  without 
prayers  or  the  miniatiy  of  the  clergy." 

Let  us  go  now  from  England  to  Ger- 
many, where  Lothaire,  Emperor  and  King, 
was  excommunicated  t  y  Nicolas  the  First 
for  associating  Veldreda,  a  concubine,  with 
his  lawful  wife  Therberga  King  Robert 
also  was  excommunicated  by  Gregorius  V. 
for  marrying  a  relative  of  his  mother,  within 
the  degrees  of  affinity.  So  completely  was 
he  abandoned  by  all  his  friends,  that  only 
two  poor  slaves  remained  with  him  to  serve 
his  table  ;  and  yet  so  loathsome  was  even 
that  simple  duty,  that  they  burned  all  the 
vessels  in  which  the  king's  meat  and  drink 
was  served  up.  When  Philippus  the  First 
repudiated  his  lawful  wife  Bertha,  and  took 
Bertrada  his  concubine  to  wife,  he  was  ex- 
communicated by  Pope  Urban  II.  Ivo, 
Cardinal  legate  of  Innocent  II  ,  laid  the 
kingdom  of  France  under  interdict,  because 
Rudolph,  Count  of  Verdun,  divorced  his 
wife  and  married  a  sister  of  the  Queen,  and 
because  Louis  VII.  contumaciously  opposed 
the  orders  of  the  Sovereign  Pontitf.  These 
examples,  however,  were  not  sufficient  to 
deter  Philippus  Augustus  from  repudiating 
his  lawful  Queen  Gereberga,  and  forming  a 
criminal  connection  with  Agnes ;  but  to 
punish  that  crime,  "  the  whole  territory  of 
the  King  of  France,"  says  Baronius.  *•  was 
laid  under  the  strictest  interdict,  so  that  all 
the  churches  were  closed  and  the  bodies  of 
the  dead  were  never  buried  in  cemeteries, 
but  left  rotting  in  all  quarters  of  the  earth." 
France  lay  during  eight  months  under  this 
interdict,  and  then,  as  had  already  hap- 
pened, under  Philippus  the  First,  all  the 
public  documents  and  deeds  were  dated,  as 
I  have  heard,  in  the  reign  of  Christ. 

Spain  itself  has  not  been  exempt  from 
these  visitations.  When  Innocent  III.  was 
informed  that  the  King  of  Leon  had  mar- 
ried his  cousin,  the  daughter  of  the  King  of 
Portugal,  he  excommunicated  the  incestu- 
ous couple  and  the  King  of  Portugal  him- 
self, and  laid  their  kingdoms  under  an 
interdict.  Again,  Sanchez,  King  of  Portu- 
gal, having  married  his  daughter  Tarsia  to 
his  nephew  Adelphonso,  King  of  Gallicia, 
Celestmus  III.,  excommunicated  Adelphon- 
8us,  and  laid  his  k;no;dom  under  interdict 
until  after  a  lapse  of  five  years,  during 
which  three  sons  were  born  to  him  ;  he  at 
last  dismissed  her.  Portugal  was  under  an 
interdict  during  full  twelve  years  for  no 
other  reason  than  the  repudiation  of  his 
wife  by  King  Alphonsus,  and  his  cohabiting 
with  a  concubine.  The  kingdom  of  Na- 
varre, also,  was  interdicted  during  one  year 
by  Pope  Julius  II. 

Poland  also  suffered  under  these  penal- 
ties. Gregorius  VII.  placed  the  whole 
province  of  Gnesen,  the  metropolitan  cf 


Cracow,  under  a  general  interdict  on  ac- 
count of  the  murder  of  St.  Stanislaus,  and 
deprived  King  Boleslaus  of  all  regal  honors 
and  authority.  Celestinus  II  f.  also  ana- 
thematized Leopold,  Duke  of  Austria,  for 
disobedience  and  subjected  his  territory  to 
interdict.  Need  I  mention  the  Emperors 
of  Germany,  Henry  III.,  Henry  IV.,  Fred- 
eric II.,  and  Henry  V.,  who  were  often 
smitten  with  the  thunders  of  the  Church, 
and  Henry  III.  and  Frederic,  who  were, 
moreover,  deposed  from  their  Imperial 
thrones  by  the  Popea,  and  beheld  all  their 
subjects  absolved  from  that  oath  of  allegi- 
ance which  had  once  bound  the  people  re- 
ligously  to  their  masters. 

Even  in  Italy  the  city  of  Naples  was  laid 
under  anathema  by  Adrian  II.  Rome  her- 
self, the  head  of  cities,  suffered  a  similar 
punishment  for  wounding  a  Cardinal ;  and 
Florence,  also,  for  hanging  a  Bishop. 
Rome  was  punished  by  Alexander  III. ; 
Florence  by  Sixtus  IV.  But  long  before 
that  period  St.  Catherine  of  Sienna  had  pre- 
vailed upon  Gregorius  XI.  to  relieve  the 
Florentines  from  the  sentence  of  interdict. 
Thus,  to  sum  up  in  one  word,  every  country 
in  Europe  was  punished  by  those  scourges 
for  some  heinous  crime.  Ireland  alone 
never  compelled  the  Pope  to  wield  the 
spiritual  sword  against  her,  for  she  has  at 
all  times  devotedly  persisted  in  her  obedi- 
ence to  him,  and  never  raised  her  own  re- 
bellious will  against  his  authority.  Neither 
were  her  kings  aver  contaminated  by  crimes 
heinous  enough  to  excite  the  indignat-on 
of  the  Pope  to  excommunicate  them  and  to 
absolve  their  subjects  from  the  oath  of  al- 
legiance. ***** 

When  heresy  first  acquired  its  political 
ascendancy  in  Ireland  there  was  no  point 
of  Catholic  doctrine  for  which  the  Irish 
were  more  persecuted  than  for  their  con- 
stant profession  that  the  Pope  was  the 
Supreme  Visible  Ruler  of  the  Church  Mili- 
tant, and  for  their  unflinching  refusal  to 
take  the  oath  of  the  King's  ecclesiastical 
supremacy,  though  the  heretics  exhausted 
all  the  appliances  of  force  and  persuasion 
to  compel  them  to  renounce  the  authority 
of  the  Pope. 

In  Ireland,  the  cities  and  municipalities 
were  authorized  by  an  ancient  privilege 
conferred  on  them  by  the  King,  to  elect 
from  among  their  citizens  or  burgesses  a 
magistrate  to  watch  over  the  common  in- 
terests. But  if  he  presumed  to  enter  on 
his  office  without  having  previously  taken 
the  oath  of  supremacy  he  was  carried  off  to 
Dublin  and  lodged  in  prison,  and  when  he 
persisted  that  the  Pope  was  the  Supreme 
Visible  Head  of  the  Church  Militant,  he 
was  detained  in  prison  until  he  abdicated  his 
office  and  was  condemned  to  a  fine,  which 
generally  was  greater  than  all  his  wealth. 


142 


THK       POFK       AND       IBBLAND. 


Student*  of  our  common  law,  after  great 
labor  and  enormous  expense  incurred  in 
the  study  of  law,  were  not  only  debarred 
from  ever  sitting  as  judges  in  the  courts  and 
tribunals,  but  were,  moreover,  prevented 
from  pleading  even  in  civil  or  criminal 
cases,  because  they  firmly  refused  to  re- 
nounce the  Pope  and  take  the  oath  of  the 
King's  ecclesiastical  supremacy.  This  unan- 
imity in  maintaining  the  supremacy  of 
the  Pope  had  long  since  taken  firm  hold  of 
the  souls  of  the  Irish.  Even  at  the  very 
birth  of  the  English  heresy,  when  King 
Henry  VIII.  first  revolted  from  the  au- 
thority of  the  Pope,  John  Travers,  an  Irish- 
man and  Doctor  of  Divinity,  published  a 
work  strenuously  advocating  the  supremacy 
of  the  Pope  over  the  Church.  When  asked 
by  his  judges  who  was  the  author  of  the 
book,  he  held  out  the  thumb,  index  and 
middle  finger  of  his  right  hand  before  the 
judges,  "  these  fingers,"  he  nobly  avowed, 
"wrote  that  book,  and  I  shall  never  forget 
the  labor  it  cost  me."  For  this  heroic  deed 
his  unjust  judges  ordered  his  right  hand  to 
be  cut  off  and  cast  into  the  fire,  but  the 
three  fingers  were  taken  out  unhurt  from 
the  flames  and  persevered  afterwards  by  the 
Catholics  with  religious  veneration. 

What  need  of  more  ?  Of  all  the  countries 
in  Europe  subject  to  heretical  kings,  there 
is  not  one  in  which  a  greater  number  of 
subjects  have  preserved  in  the  old  faith, 
and  in  obedience  to  the  Sovereign  Pontiff, 
than  in  Ireland.  Cardinal  Bentivoglio  has 
truly  observed,  "that  the  Irish  would  seem 
to  have  sucked  in  the  Catholic  faith  with 
their  mother's  milk."  In  other  countries 
smitten  with  heresy  the  majority  followed 
the  example  of  the  King  or  other  governing 
power  of  the  state  and  renounced  the  old 
faith  and  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope.  But 
in  Ireland,  I  do  not  hesitate  to  assert,  that 
not  U  e  tenth,  nor  the  hundredth,  •  no  nor 
the  thousandth  part  revolted  from  the  fa'th 
of  their  fathers  to  the  camp  of  the  heretics. 
Orlandinus  might  say,  with  perfect  truth, 
"  that  the  Irish  had  preserved  in  heart  and 
soul  the  Catholic  faith  in  all  its  integrity, 
and  the  most  devoted  obedience  to  the 
Roman  Pontiff."  And  Bozius  also,  "as 
far  as  we  can  judge  from  history,  not  one 
of  all  the  northern  nations  has  been  more 
constant  in  the  profession  of  the  one  faith." 
May  I  not  then  apply  to  the  Irish  what 


Virgilius  sang  regarding  the  Romano  : 

"  Let  others  better  mould  the  running  ma»a 
Of  metals,  and  inform  the  breathing  brats  ; 
And  soften  into  flesh  a  marble  face  ; 
Plead  better  at  the  bar  :  describe  the  t-kies, 
And  when  the  stars  descend,  and  when  they  rise. 
But,  Erin,  be  It  thine,  mark  well !  I  pray. 
Thy  faith  to  hold,  Christ's  vicar  to  obey." 

The  following  passage  of  the  author  of 
the  Analecta  may  be  appropriately  intro- 
duced here.  "  Though  the  authority  of  the 
Pope  has  been  long  since  proscribed  and 
condemned  by  all  the  public  authorities  and 
tribunals,  and  by  the  laws  of  the  land,  no 
violence  could  extinguish,  nor  fear  obliter- 
ate, the  ardent  attachment  to  the  Vicar  of 
Christ,  which  is  deeply  imprinted  on  the 
hearts  of  these  people.  Laws,  discipline, 
and  forms  of  government  have  been  changed, 
but  wherever  they  interfered  with  religion 
no  violence  or  artifice  could  induce  the  peo- 
ple to  adopt  them.  Knavery  was  employed 
to  deceive,  seduction  to  allure,  insult  to 
provoke,  intrigue  to  solicit,  threats  to  ter- 
rify, rewards  to  conciliate.  They  oppress 
and  they  promise,  they  chalk  out  their  ap- 
proach and  seize  all  the  avenues  ;  they  work 
both  the  mine  and  the  battery ;  all  ma- 
chines are  plied,  but  all  in  vain  ;  they  do 
not  advance  one  inch  ;  we  gain  more  on 
them  than  they  on  us." 

Truly  hath  Andrew  Thevet  asserted  "that 
the  people  of  Ireland  have  maintained  the 
Christian  religion  in  all  its  integrity  in  des- 
pite of  the  English;  who  exerted  all  their 
strength  to  prevent  and  involve  them  in 
their  own  execrable  sect.  When  the  su- 
preme council  of  the  Catholics  of  Ireland 
refused  obedience  to  the  censures  of  the 
Pope's  Nuncio  in  the  year  1648,  the  vast 
majority  of  the  Iriah  adhered  to  him  and 
left  but  few  supporters  to  the  council.  The 
common  people  were  inflamed  with  so  ar- 
dent a  love  of  the  Pope,  that  they  deemed 
it  an  inexplicable  crime  not  to  obey  the 
orders  of  his  minister.  Tumults  frequently 
burst  forth  like  a  torrent  in  all  quarters, 
and  contentions  were  rife  in  public  and  pri- 
vate. The  chief  men  of  the  confederate 
Catholics  themselves  maintained  the  princi- 
ple, for  they  appealed  to  the  Pope  himself. 
Thus  all  orders  have  been  at  all  times  unani- 
imous  in  Ireland  in  their  profound  rever- 
ence and  obedience  to  the  supreme  author- 
ity of  the  Pope. 


THE      POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


143 


CHAPTER    XXVI. 

Ireland's  Aid  to  Home  in  the  Propagation  of  the  Faith.— Irish  Saints  and  Apostolic 
Missionaries  who  Helped  to  Spread  Christianity  Throughout  Europe. 


In  order  to  illustrate  the  unity  which 
existed  between  Rome  and  Ireland  through- 
out all  ?ges,  from  the  time  of  St.  Patrick 
down  to  the  twelfth  century,  Dr.  Lynch 
presented  the  following  important  historical 
facts  to  his  readers,  and  as  the  glory  of 
Ireland  is  one  of  the  greatest  objects  of  this 
work,  we  present  the  following  pages  from 
Cambrensis  Emrsus  as  valuable  testimony 
that  both  Rome  and  Ireland  were  a  unit  in 
the  true  Faith,  notwithstanding  the  slurs 
cast  upon  Ireland  by  the  English  forger  of 
the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls.  On  this 
interesting  historical  subject  Father  Lynch 
says: 

But  it  was  not  in   our  times  alone,   and 
in  those  of  our  fathers  and   grandfathers, 
that  the  Irish  clung  with  invincible  fidelity 
to   the   Pope ;    they    evinced,    in     ancient 
times,  the  same  devoted  attachment  to  the 
Catholic    faith    and    to   the    head    of    the 
Church.     "  The  reverence  of    the    Irish," 
says  Lombard,   "  for  the  authority  of  the 
Apostolic  See,  so  far  transcends  their  rev- 
erence for  all   other   powers  and   dignities, 
that  they  bow  to  its  authority,  not  only  in 
ecclesiastical  but  even  in  temporal  affairs." 
If  what  Polydorous  relates  be  true,    "the 
Irish    subjected   themselves  and  all    their 
rig  its   to  the   dominion  of    the    Apostolic 
See,  and  invariably  professed  that  the  Pope 
was  their  sole  Lord  from  the  time  that  the 
Christian    religion     was     first     established 
among  them."     Sanders   repeats  the   same 
assertion  in  nearly  the  same  words,    "  that 
they    never    admitted   any   other  supreme 
Lord  but  the  Pope."     Keating  refers  this 
acknowledgment  of  the  temporal  sovereign- 
ty  of  the   Pope  to   a  later  period,    when 
Donnchadh  O'Briain,  son  of  Brian  Borum- 
ha,  and  King  of  Ireland  according  to  him, 
but  of  Munster  only  according  to  all  others, 
and  even  deposed  from  that  throne  in  1604, 
went  on  a  pilgrimage  to  Rome,   and,    with 
the  consent  of  all  his  chieftains,  surrendered 
the  supreme  dominion  of  Ireland  into  the 
hands  of  the  Pope. 

Though  there  are  strong  reasons  to  doubt 
the  accuracy  of  those  statements  of   Poly- 


dorous, Sanders  and  Keating,  and  powerful 
arguments  to  prove  that  the  Irish  never 
surrendered  the  political  supremacy  of  their 
country  to  the  Pope,  it  is  an  undoubted  an 
incontrovertible  fact  that,  from  the  mo- 
ment the  Irish  received  the  faith,  all  their 
principles  in  religious  affairs  were  sub- 
ordinate to  the  power  of  the  Pope  ;  and  the 
great  pillars  of  our  Church  in  all  ages  and 
conjunctures  sought  in  Rome  direction  and 
authority  for  all  their  arrangements  in 
ecclesiastical  concerns.  On  the  first  dawn 
of  the  Christian  faith,  St.  Mansuetus,  an 
Irshman,  went  to  Rome  in  the  year  66, 
and  met  St.  Peter,  Prince  of  the  Apostles, 
by  whom,  according  to  Saussaye,  "he  was 
baptized  in  the  saving  waters,  and  renoun- 
cing his  old  Gentile  name,  with  the  old 
man,  took  the  name  Mansuetus,  as  a  type 
of  the  lamblike  gentleness  of  his  character. 
He  was  then  sent  by  St.  Peter  to  enlighten 
with  the  rays  of  divine  faith  the  city  of 
Tulle  in  Lorrain."  St.  Kiaran,  Bishop  of 
Saighir,  having  heard  in  the  year  382  of 
the  fame  of  the  Christian  religion  in  Rome, 
left  Ireland  and  went  to  that  city,  where 
he  was  baptized  and  instructed  in  the  faith 
of  Christ,  and  remained  there  twenty  years 
studying  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  collecting  its 
different  books,  and  acquiring  a  full  know- 
ledge of  all  the  details  of  ecclesiastical  dis- 
cipline, until  he  was  consecrated  Bishop.'' 

Again,  "St.  Hilarius,  seeing  the  great 
holiness  of  St.  Ailbhe,  sent  him  to  our  Lord 
the  Pope  to  be  consecrated  Bishop.  He 
was  most  graciously  welcomed  by  the  Holy 
Pontiff,  and  remained  with  him  one  year 
and  fifty  days."  Now,  there  came  at  the 
same  time  50  other  holy  men  after  St. 
Ailbhe  from  Ireland  to  Rome,  and  when 
they  met  the  Pope  and  St.  Ailbhe,  the 
Pope  appointed  a  monastery  for  themselves 
and  placed  them  under  the  government  of 
St.  Ailbhe.  Many  of  them  were  homony- 
mous  ;  thus,  12  Colmanns,  12  Caeimhghins, 
12  Fintans."  This  residence  of  St.  Ailbhe 
and  his  associates  at  Rome  is  referred  by 
Ussher  to  the  year  397. 

About  the  same  time,  also,  St.  Declan, 
as  his  life  informs  us,  conceived  the  design 
of  going  to  Rome  to  learn  the  Canons  of 
the  Church  and  to  receive  permission  from 
the  Apostolic  See  to  preach,  and  also  to 


144 


THR      POPK      AND      IRSLAND. 


introduce  the  Ritual  and  rules  of  the 
Roman  Church.  Now,  when  he  and  hia 
holy  companions  arrived  in  Rome,  the  Pope 
received  him  with  great  demonstrations  of 
joy  and  proclaimed  to  the  Roman  people 
his  high  descent  and  his  great  virtue,  so 
that  the  holy  deacon  was  exceedingly  hon- 
ored and  beloved  by  the  clergy  and  people 
of  Rome. 

St.  Seizin  also  attended  the  scripture 
schools  in  Rome  in  the  year  435,  and  was  after- 
wards consecrated  Bishop  by  the  apostplical 
authority  of  Celestinus  the  First,  and  Ap- 
pointed to  accompany  St.  Patrick  in  his 
Irish  mission. 

St.  Ibar  afterwards  went  to  Rome,  ac- 
companied by  his  diaciple  St.  Abban,  who, 
on  three  subsequent  occasions,  made  fie 
same  pilgrimage  in  honor  of  Christ.  St. 
End  a  also  went  to  Rome  about  the  year 
461,  and  Scothin,  a  disciple  of  St.  David 
(who  died  in  the  year  550)  having,  on  one 
occasion,  some  urgent  business  to  be  settled 
at  Rome,  is  said  to  have  journeyed,  or 
rather  to  have  been  translated  thither,  in 
one  day  from  Ireland,  and  after  dispatching 
all  his  business,  to  have  returned  to  Ireland 
in  the  next. 

St.  Cassau,  a  Bishop,  who  flourished 
about  the  year  405,  took  some  companions 
with  him  to  Rome,  "to  imbibe  true  learning 
and  piety  at  the  fountain  head." 

St.  Mochta,  a  Bishop,  "was  engaged  in 
his  sacred  studies  in  Rome  in  the  year  480. 
He  was  a  favorite  of  God  and  man,  every 
day  surpassing  himself  in  wisdom  and  edify- 
ing others  by  word  and  example.  Disciples 
crowded  around  him,  who  imbibed  from 
his  holy  soul  the  salutary  waters  of  wisdom, 
and  became  perfect  men  in  faith,  word  and 
work.  His  extensive  erudition,  adorned  as 
it  was  by  a  life  of  unsullied  purity,  having 
induced  the  Fope  to  exalt  him  to  the  epis- 
copal rank,  he  returned  to  his  own  country 
with  the  authority  and  blessing  of  the  Pon- 
tiff, accompanied  by  twelve  associates  " 

In  the  year  522,  St.  Nennidh,  went  to 
Rome  to  visit  the  tombs  of  the  apostles, 
and  during  his  pilgrimage  great  was  his 
fasting,  and  greater  still  his  abstinence  from 
all  sin.  St.  Senanus  also,  who  by  some  is 
supposed  to  be  the  Archbishop  of  Ardmacha, 
"  went  to  Rome  to  visit  the  tombs  of  the 
apostles.  He  flourished  about  the  year 
544.  Nearly  at  the  same  period  St.  Car- 
thac  the  Elder  also  visited  Rome. " 

St.  Barr,  Bishop,  with  twelve  compani 
ons,  amongst  whom  were  St.  Eulogius  and 
St.  Maidoc,  of  Fearna-mor  (Ferns),  having 
gone  on  a  pilgrimage  about  this  time  to 
Britain,  proceeded  thence  accompanied  by 
St.  David  of  Menavia,  ''on  a  pilgrimage 
to  Rome  to  visit  the  tomb  of  the  apostles." 
St.  Fridian  or  Finnan,  "visited  the  tomb 
of  the  apostlea  in  555."  His  learning  and 


piety,  his  high  rank  and  singular  beauty  of 
person,  secured  for  him  an  honorable  re- 
ception from  Pope  Pelagius  with  whom  he 
remained  during  three  months,  having  in 
that  short  space  of  time  made  himself  per- 
fect master  of  the  ecclesiastical  and  apos- 
tolical discipline :  for  he  was  a  man  of 
brilliant  genius.  Having  received,  accord- 
ing to  the  usual  custom,  the  Pope's  bless- 
ing, he  returned  to  his  own  country. 

About  the  year  599,  St.  Dagan,  Abbot, 
but  afterwards  Bishop,  "going  on  a  pil- 
grimage to  Rome,  brought  with  him  the 
rule  which  St.  Molua  had  prescribed  and 
dictated  for  his  monks.  When  Pope  St. 
Gregorius  read  that  rule  he  said  before  all 
present.  '  the  Saint  that  composed  that 
rule  made  a  bulwark  around  his  monks  that 
raised  them  to  heaven.'  So  Pope  St.  Gre- 
gorius sent  his  prayers  and  his  blessing  to 
St.  Molua." 

In  the  year  628,  St.  Laisrean  "  went  to 
Rome  with  fifty  holy  men,  where  he  was 
ordained  and  consecrated  Bishop  by  the 
Pope  and  appointed  apostolical  legate  on 
his  return  to  Ireland."  For  when  the 
Paschal  controversy  was  discussed  in  the 
synod  of  Leith-ghlinn  (Leighlin),  and  could 
not  easily  be  decided,  ''it  was  decreed,' 
as  Cumin  relates,  "ty  our  seniors,  accord- 
ing to  the  command,  that  if  any  difference 
arise  between  cause  and  cause,  and  opinions 
vary  between  leprosy  and  no  leprosy,  they 
should  go  to  the  place  which  the  Lord  hath 
chosen  ;"  and  if  the  cause  was  one  of  the 
causes  majores,  that  it  should  be  referred 
to  the  head  of  cities  according  to  the  syn- 
odical  canon.'  We,  accordingly,  sent  men 
of  tried  wisdom  and  humility,  who,  by  the 
favor  of  God,  had  a  prosperous  journey, 
and  some  of  them  arriving  in  the  city  of 
Rome,  returned  thence  to  us  in  the  third 
year."  St.  Laisrean  was  the  principal  of 
those  legates.  About  the  year  630,  St. 
Caidoc  renounced,  with  St.  Richarius,  the 
vanity  of  the  world  and  retired  to  Rome. 
St.  Monon  retired  thither  also  about  the 
same  period.  In  the  year  648,  "  the  Pope 
earnestly  entreated  St.  Fursa  to  remain  at 
Rome  and  consent  to  be  enrolled  among  the 
lordb  of  the  Roman  court  (to  use  the  old 
words  of  the  legend)  that  is,  the  College  of 
Cardinals.  But  no  importunities  could  in- 
duce him  to  accept  the  offer.  The  Pope 
then  invested  him  with  all  his  authority, 
and  gave  him  different  relics  of  saints  and  a 
pastoral  staff,  resembling  in  shape  the  pil- 
grim's staff,  which  had  been  used  by  several 
Popes  before  himself,  and  also  consecrated 
him  and  St.  Foilan  Bishops."  Molanus 
also  records  of  St.  Foilan,  "that  he  went 
to  Rome  to  obtain  the  blessing  of  the  Pope 
for  the  conversion  of  the  infidels." 

St.  Indracht,  son  of  the  King  <>f  Ireland, 
"went  to  Rome  w.th  nine  companions,  but 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


145 


returning  thence  in  the  year  678,  was  mar- 
tyred. St.  Kilian  also  abstained  from 
preaching  the  Word  of  God  until  he  had 
presented  himself  to  Pope  Conon  in  Rome 
in  the  year  686,  in  order  to  receive  from  the 
See  of  Rome  the  entire  deposit  of  Christian 
doctrine  and  authority  to  preach  it." 

If  I  allowed  myself  to  detail  at  length 
the  intercourse  of  the  Irish  with  Rome  in 
former  ages,  my  page  would  swell  to  un- 
reasonable limits  and  exhaust  my  power  of 
language,  though  not  the  subject  itself. 
Such  prolixity  would  also,  no  doubt,  weary 
the  patience  of  my  reader.  To  sum  up 
then  in  a  few  words  ;  no  dissension  on  re- 
ligious matters  ever  arose  in  Ireland  which 
was  not  instantly  referred  to  Rome  for  ad- 
judication. From  Rome  Ireland  had.  her  pre- 
cepts of  morality  and  her  oracles  of  faith. 
Rome  was  the  mother,  Ireland  the  daugh- 
ter ;  Rome  the  head,  Ireland  the  member. 
From  Rome  the  fountain  head  of  religion, 
Ireland  undoubtedly  derived,  and  with  her 
whole  soul  imbibed  her  faith.  In  doubtful 
matters  the  Pope  was  ever  the  arbiter  of 
the  Irish ;  in  things  certain,  their  master  ; 
in  ecclesiastical  matters,  their  head ;  in 
temporals,  their  defender;  in  all  things 
their  judge  ;  in  every  thing  their  adviser; 
their  oracle  in  doubt,  their  bulwark  in  the 
hour  of  danger.  Some  hastened  to  Rome 
to  indulge  their  fervor  at  the  tomb  of  the 
apostles  ;  others  to  lay  their  homage  at  the 
feet  of  the  Pope,  and  others  to  obtain  the 
necessary  sanction  of  his  authority  for  the 
discharge  of  their  functions.  *  *  * 

All  the  world  knows  that  the  Irish  went 
over,  hot  one  by  one,  but  in  crowds,  to 
Britain,  to  Gaul,  to  Belgium,  and  to  Ger- 
many, to  convert  the  inhabitants  of  those 
regions  to  the  Christian  religion,  and  bring 
them  under  the  obedience  of  the  Roman 
Pontiff.  A  signal  testimony  to  this  fact  is 
found  in  the  letter  of  Eric  of  Auxerre  to 
Charles  the  Bald.  "  Need  I  mention  Ire- 
land ;  she,  despising  the  dangers  of  the  deep, 
emigrates  to  our  shores,  with  almost  the  en- 
tire host  of  her  philosophers ;  the  most  emi- 
nent amongst  them  become  voluntary  exiles, 
to  minister  to  the  wishes  of  our  most  wise 
Solomon."  Such,  also,  is  the  testimony  of 
St.  Bernard,  "from  Ireland,  as  from  an 
overflowing  stream,  crowds  of  holy  men  de- 
scended on  foreign  nations."  Walfridus 
Strabo  says,  "that  the  habit  of  emigrating 
had  become  a  second  nature  to  the  Scoti." 
namely,  the  Irish,  as  I  have  already  proved  ; 
hence  the  just  observation  of  Osborne,  that 
the  habit  of  emigrating  "had  taken  the 
strongest  hold  of  the  Irish.  For  what  the 
piety  of  other  nations  has  made  a  habit, 
they  have  changed  from  habit  into  nature. " 
Those  holy  emigrants  of  the  Irish  were  dis- 
tinguished by  a  peculiarity,  never,  or  but 
very  seldom  found  among  other  nations. 


As  soon  as  it  became  known  that  any  eminent 
Monk  had  resolved  to  undertake  one  of 
these  sacred  expeditions,  twelve  men  of  the 
same  order  placed  themselves  under  his 
command,  and  were  selected  to  accompany 
him  ;  a  custom  probably  introduced  by  St. 
Patrick,  who  had  been  ably  supported  by 
twelve  chosen  associates  in  converting  the 
Irish  from  the  darkness  of  paganism  to  the 
light  of  the  true  Faith.  St.  Fioch,  nephew 
of  St.  Patrick,  and  walking  in  his  footsteps, 
was  attended  in  his  sacred  mission  to  foreign 
tribes  and  regions  by  twelve  colleagues  of 
his  own  order ;  and  when  St.  Rupert,  who 
had  been  baptized  by  a  nephew  of  St.  Patrick, 
apostle  of  IreLnd,  departed  to  draw  down 
the  fertilizing  dews  of  true  religion  on  pagan 
Bavaria,  twelve  faithful  companions  shared 
the  perils  and  labors  of  his  journey  and  mis- 
sion. St.  Finnian,  Bishop  of  Cluain-irard, 
selected  twelve  from  the  thronged  college  of 
his  disciples,  to  devote  them,  in  a  special 
manner,  to  establish  and  to  animate  the 
principles  of  the  Christian  religion  among 
the  Irish ;  and  Columba  was  accompanied  in 
his  apostolic  mission  to  Scotland  by  twelve 
Monks.  Twelve  followed  St.  Finnbar  in  his 
pilgrimage  beyond  the  seas,  and  twelve  St. 
Maidoc,  Bishop  of  Fearna-mor,  in  one  of  his 
foreign  missions.  St.  Colman  Finn  was 
never  seen  without  his  college  of  twelve 
disciples.  When  the  ceaseless  eruptions  of 
foreign  enemies,  or  the  negligence  of  the 
Bishops  had  well  nigh  extinguished  the 
virtue  of  religion  in  Gaul,  and  left  nothing 
but  the  Christian  faith — when  the  medicine 
of  penance  and  the  love  of  mortification 
were  found  nowhere,  or  but  with  a  few, 
"then,"  says  Jonas,  "St.  Columbanus  de- 
scended on  Gaul,  supported  by  twelve  as- 
sociates, to  arouse  her  from  her  torpor,  and 
to  enlighten  her  sons  with  the  beams  of  the 
most  exalted  piety."  Twelve  disciples  fol- 
lowed St.  Eloquius  from  Ireland  to  illumine 
the  B  slgians  with  the  rays  of  faith  ;  twelve 
accompanied  St.  Willibrord  from  Ireland  to 
Germany,  the  pilgrimage  and  labors  of  St. 
Farannan,  in  Belgium,  were  shared  by  twelve 
faithful  Brothers  of  the  cowl ;  and  the  same 
number  were  fellow  exiles  with  St.  Maccal- 
lann.  Perhaps  the  reason,  why  the  Irish 
clung  with  such  invincible  attachment 
to  this  custom,  was  the  number  of 
the  apostles  chosen  by  our  Saviour,  and  the 
same  number  of  disciples  appointed  by  the 
Apostolic  See  to  accompany  Palladius  to 
Ireland. 

But  it  was  not  in  companies  of  twelve, 
alone,  that  great  men  went  forth  from  Ire- 
Ian  to  plant  or  to  revive  sound  doctrine  and 
discipline  in  foreign  lands.  Bodies,  far  more 
numerous,  are  also  mentioned.  St.  Albert 
was  accompanied  by  nineteen  disciples. 
Sixty  accompanied  St.  Brendan  in  his  voyage 
in  search  of  the  land  yf  promise.  St.  Guigner, 


146 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


son  of  the  King  of  Ireland,  passed  over  to 
Britain,  with  a  noble  band  of  777  associates; 
and  St  Blaithmac,  son  of  the  King  of  Ire- 
land, was  followed  thither  by  a  good  number 
of  Monks.  St  Donnanus  led  away  from  his 
country  fifty-two  associates.  Twenty-four 
disciples  of  St.  Ailbhe  were  sent  by  him  to 
propagate  the  faith  in  Iceland.  St.  Emilius 
brought  to  the  aid  of  St.  Fursa  at  Lagny,  a 
large  body  of  their  countrymen,  and  gave 
him  wonderful  aid  in  instilling  the  grace  of 
God  into  the  souls  of  men.  St.  Sezin  was 
accompanied  by  seventy  disciples  to  Bre- 
tagne,  and  Alsace  welcomed  St.  Florentius, 
with  Arbogastus,  Theodatus,  and  Hildulph. 

Irish  Saints  are  also  found  toiling  in 
strange  lands,  in  smaller  numbers,  and 
fertilizing  them  abundantly  with  the  dew 
of  their  faith  and  of  their  virtues.  In  Italy 
there  were  Donatus  of  Fiesole,  Andrew,  and 
his  sister,  St.  Brighid  of  Opaca  ;  in  Picardy, 
SS.  Caidoc  and  Fricorius,  otherwise  Adrian; 
at  Rhemess,  SS.  Gibrian,  Tressan,  Hselen, 
Abraui,  German,  Veran,  Petroan,  Promptia, 
Possenna,  and  Trada  ;  at  Paris,  hence  they 
were  styled  by  posterity  the  twelve  apostles 
of  Ireland.  St.  Claude,  Clement,  and  John; 
among  the  Morini  (of  Boulogne),  SS.  Vul- 
gan,  Kilian,  and  Obod ;  in  the  territory  of 
Beauvais,  SS.  Maura  and  Brighid,  virgins 
and  martyrs,  and  their  brothers  Hyspad  ;  at 
Fusciria,  SS.  Mathilda,  virgin,  and  her 
brother  Alexander.  In  Kleggon,  a  district 
in  Germany,  St.  Northberga,  with  Sista,  and 
nine  others  of  her  children.  At  Ratisbon, 
SS.  Marian,  John,  Candid  us,  Clement,  Mur- 
cherdach,  Magnoald,  and  Isaac.  In  Aus- 
trasia,  SS.  Kilian,  Cohonatus,  and  Totnan; 
and  St.  Cathro  and  his  associates  at  Walcedor. 
These  devoted  their  lives  to  the  instruction 
of  the  people,  and  were  celebrated  for  the 
miraculous  favors  obtained  by  their  inter- 
cession. 

Though  it  would  be  too  tedious  to  mention, 
in  detiil,  the  great  number  of  our  country- 
men who  were  distinguished  on  the  conti- 
nent for  their  marvellous  works,  and  for  the 
sanctity  of  their  lives,  it  wouid  be  unpar- 
donable to  omit  them  altogether.  Not  tak- 
ing into  account  those  who  were  canonized 
in  Britain,  nor  those  who  went  over  to  the 
continent  in  large  bodies,  we  have  in  Italy, 
St.  Cathaldus,  patron  of  Tarentum,  St.  Don- 
atus.  patron  of  Fiesole,  St.  Emilian,  pitron 
of  F-iventum,  and  St.  Frigidian  of  Lucca. 
Pa  via  honors  John  A  Ibinus  as  the  founder  of 
her  University  ;  and  St.  Cumean  is,  above 
all  other  Irish  saints,  the  favorite  patron  of 
Bobio. 

In  Gaul,  St.  Manauetus  is  patron  of  Tulle; 
St.  Finlag,  Abbot  of  St.  Simphorian,  patron 
of  Metz;  and  St.  Pnecordins  of  Corbie,  situ- 
ate between  Amiens  and  Peronne.  Amiens 
honors  St.  Forcensius  and  Poitiers,  St. 
Fridolinus,  Abbot  of  the  monastery  of  St. 


Hilarius.  St  Elias  is  patron  of  Angouleme. 
St.  Anatolius  of  Besancon,  St.  Fiacre  of 
Meaux,  St.  Fursa  of  Peronne,  and  St. 
Laurence  of  Eu.  Lietje  honors  St.  Mo  mo, 
and  Strasburgh  SS.  Florentius  and  Arbo- 
gastus. In  Bretagne,  SS.  Origin,  Joava, 
Tenan,  Gildas,  Brioc,  and  many  others  are 
revered  as  patrons.  In  Rhemes  and  the 
surrounding  district;  SS.  Gibrian,  Heran, 
German,  Veran,  Abran,  Petran,  and  three 
sisters.  Frauda,  Tompa  and  Passima,  are 
held  in  the  highest  veneration.  In  Bur 
gundy,  the  vineyard  of  the  Lord  yielded  an 
abundant  harvest  to  the  zeal  of  St.  Colum- 
banus,  who  founded  there  a  great  number  of 
monasteries  and  colleges  of  Monks,  restored 
the  true  service  of  God,  and  left  there  after 
him  Deicolus,  Columbinus,  and  Anatolius. 
In  Burgundy,  also,  St.  Maimbod  is  honored 
as  a  martyr. 

In  Belgium,  you  have  in  Barbant,  SS. 
Rumold,  Fredegand,  Himelin,  Dympna,  and 
Gerebernus.  In  Flanders,  SS.  Levin, 
Guthagon,  Columbanus ;  in  Artois,  SS. 
Liugluio,  Liuglianus,  Kilian,  Vulgan-Fursa, 
and  Obodius  ;  in  Hainault,  SS.  Etto,  Adal- 
gisus,  Abel,  Wasuulph,  and  Mombolus ;  in 
Naniur.  SS.  Farannan  and  Eloquius;  in 
Liege,  SS.  Ultan,  Foil  Ian,  and  Bertuin  ;  in 
Gueldres,  SS.  Wiro,  Plechelm,  and  Othger ; 
in  Holland,  St.  Hiero ;  in  Friealand,  SS. 
Suitbert  and  Acca. 

But  Germany,  especially,  was  the  most 
flourishing  vineyard  of  our  saints.  St. 
Albuin,  or  Witta.  is  honored  as  apostle  in 
Thuringia ;  St.  Disibode,  at  Treves ;  St., 
Erhard,  in  Alsace  and  Bavaria  ;  St.  Frido 
in  the  Grisons  of  Switzerland ;  St.  Gall, 
among  the  Suabians,  Swiss,  and  Rhsetians  ; 
St  John,  in  Mecklenberg ;  St.  Virgil,  at 
Saltzburg ;  St.  Kilian,  in  Franconia ;  St. 
Rupert,  in  part  of  Bavaria:  From  these 
saints,  Uese  different  places  received  the 
grace  of  faith,  and  the  sacred  discipline  of 
Christian  virtue,  and  afterwards  honored  the 
memory  of  their  benefactors,  as  the  apostles 
of  their  nation.  But  these  are  not  the  only 
saints  to  whom  the  Germans  send  up  their 
filial  prayers;  equal  honors  are  paid  by  them 
to  some  other  of  our  countrymen.  St. 
Albert  is  honored  at  Ratisbon,  SS.  Deicola 
and  Fintan  at  Constance,  and  St.  Euse 
in  Coire.  The  town  and  canton  of  St.  Gall 
took  their  names  from  our  countryman,  St. 
Gall.  "This  monastery,"  says  Munster, 
"was  the  school  of  the  noble  and  of  the 
peasant,  and  the  nursery  of  a  great  number 
of  learned  men  ;  at  one  period  it  contained 
no  less  than  one  hundred  and  fifty  students 
and  Brothers."  Ireland  was,  therefore, 
both  the  athenaeum  of  learning,  and  the 
temple  of  holiness,  supplying  the  world  with 
literati,  and  heaven  with  saints.  Truly  doth 
she  appear  the  academy  of  the  earth,  and 
the  colony  of  heaven.  Was  ever  panegyric 


THE      POPE      AND      IHELAND. 


147 


more  appropriate  than  the  words  of  Eric  of 
Auxerre?  "Need  I  mention  Ireland,  who, 
despising  the  dangers  of  the  deep,  emigrates 
to  our  shores,  with  almost  the  whole  host  of 
her  philosophers  :  the  most  eminent  amongst 
them  become  voluntary  exiles  to  minister  to 
the  tastes  of  our  most  wise  Solomon? ' 

Accordingly,  the  Popes  have  frequently 
evinced  their  affectionate  solicitude  for  the 
Irish,  in  a  remarkable  degree,  when  they 
found  them  fervent  in  receiving  the  faith, 
faithful  in  observing,  constant  in  preserving, 
and  zealous  in  extending  it  to  others,  and, 
above  all,  so  convinced  in  their  hearts  of  this 
principle,  never  to  allow  themselves  to  be 
separated  from  the  visible  head  of  the 
Church  ;  lest,  if  the  life  sap  of  religion  and 
of  true  piety  should  not  circulate  constantly 
amongst  them,  they  should  shrivel  up  and 
wither,  and  be  at  length  cut  off,  and  cast 
into  eternal  flames.  They  never  dreamed  of 
building  on  any  foundation  but  on  that 
which  was  laid  by  Jesus  Christ  himself,  who 


said  to  Peter,  and,  in  him,  to  all  his  suc- 
cessors, "Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this 
rock  I  will  build  my  Church,  and  the  gates 
of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it :  and  I 
will  give  to  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  ;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  on 
earth,  shall  be  bound  in  heaven ;  and  what- 
soever thou  shall  loose  on  earth,  shall  be 
loosed  in  heaven." 

Whenever  occasion  required,  the  Popes 
were,  therefore,  ever  ready  to  bestow  their 
choicest  favors  on  the  Irish.  For,  as  the 
greatest  of  all  blessings  and  favors  is  to  point 
out  the  most  certain  path  to  salvation  by 
substituting  religion  for  superstition,  truth 
for  falsehood,  faith  for  error,  and  light  for 
darkness,  so  the  greatest  of  all  benefits  was 
conferred  on  the  Irish  by  the  Popes,  who 
commissioned  many  others  to  feed  the  lamp 
of  true  faith  amongst  them,  in  addition  to 
those  many  illustrious  men,  whom  we  have 
already  described  as  laboring  in  the  same 
noble  work. 


CHAPTER       XXVII. 

The  Irish  Church  under  the  Popes. — How  the  Holy  Union  was  kept  Intact.— List 
of  Legates  Sent  from  Rome. — Historical  Errors  Corrected  by  Dr.  Lynch. — 
His  Concluding  Remarks  in  which  he  shows  up  Cambrensis  in  the  Garb  of 
a  Notorious  Calumniator  of  Both  the  Catholic  Church  and  the  Irish  People. 


In  the  third  volume  of  his  very  valuable 
work,  which  has  proved  such  a  mine 
of  historical  lore,  and  which  has  thrown  so 
much  light  on  the  subject  under  considera- 
tion, Dr.  Lynch  introduces  the  following 
well-authenticated  evidence  in  proof  of  the 
fact  that  it  would  be  impossible  for  any  Bulls 
such  as  those  attributed  to  Popes  Adrian 
and  Alexander,  tc  originate  in  Rome,  for 
the  reason  that  both  Popes  were  too  well 
informed  concerning  the  excellent  condition 
of  the  Catholic  Church  and  the  fidelity  of  the 
Irish  people  to  the  See  of  St.  Peter,  to  use 
the  harsh,  unjust  and  untruthful  language 
in  which  both  these  Bulls  are  couched.  On 
this  and  similar  points  Dr.  Lynch  says  : 

The  labor  of  those  Popes  (Honorius  and 
John),  in  extirpating  the  Pelagian  heresy, 
and  establishing  the  canonical  observance 
of  paschal  time  in  Ireland,  were  crowned 
with  such  perfect  success,  that  the  Irish 
Church  was  now  without  a  blemish  and  at- 


tained the  summit  of  perfection.  Under 
the  care  of  the  Popes,  "she  was  presented 
as  a  glorious  Church,  not  having  spot  or 
wrinkle,  but  holy  and  immaculate."  The 
Irish,  therefore,  owe  the  whole  glory  of 
their  Church  to  the  Popes ;  and  as  eternal 
salvation  is  the  greatest  of  all  blessings, 
boundless  should  be  their  gratitude  to  the 
Popes  who  pointed  out  to  them  the  right 
road  to  heaven,  nay,  conferred,  in  a  certain 
sense,  everlasting  happiness  itself  by  show- 
ing how  it  could  be  attained.  But  when 
the  Popes  beheld  the  Irish  Church  radiant 
with  such  surpassing  splendor,  they  relaxed 
for  a  considerable  time  their  ancient  solici- 
tude for  the  Irish,  sending  neither  legates 
nor  letters,  lest  they  might  be  said  to  be 
holding  up  a  lamp  to  the  sun,  but  they  em- 
ployed an  immense  number  of  pious  and 
holy  Irishmen  in  instructing  other  nations 
in  morality  and  religion.  The  catalogue  of 
those  apostles  I  omit  inserting  at  present, 
because  I  have  given  it  in  different  parts  of 
the  work,  not  indeed  full  ard  complete  (for 
that  would  require  an  enormous  volume), 
but  such  as  the  occasion  required. 


148 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


But  as  sorrow  often  follows  on  the  foot- 
steps of  joy,  so  the  ferocity  of  the  Danes 
almost  extinguished  the  glory  of  the  Irish 
Church.  During  full  two  hundred  years, 
the  lives  and  fortunes  of  the  Irish,  laity  and 
clergy,  were  at  the  mercy  of  their  relentless 
rago  ;  palaces  and  temples  were  burned,  the 
country  laid  waste,  the  people  massacred, 
and  the  clergy  sacrificed  to  their  atrocious 
fury,  doomed,  wherever  they  were  taken, 
either  to  a  dungeon  and  chains  or  to  a  death 
of  excruciating  torture.  But  when  the 
gentle  breath  of  peace  once  more  succeeded 
the  horrid  tempest  of  war,  the  ancient  light 
of  piety  and  learning  burst  forth  afresh  ;  not 
only  could  Ireland  boast  of  having  a  high 
name  in  literature  and  piety  at  home,  but 
she  alio  sent  forth  many  (as  you  see  from 
other  parts  of  this  work)  who  revived  litera- 
ture and  piety  in  foreign  nations. 

The  torrent,  however,  which  had  so  long 
deluged  Ire'and,  left  some  of  its  slime  and 
weeds  on  the  national  fame.  To  remove 
them  the  Popes  exerted  all  their  pastoral 
solicitude,  ly  sending  legates  in  uninter- 
rupted succession  to  Ireland,  who  left  no 
source  untried  to  repair  the  lost  splendor  of 
her  religious  fame.  Gilbert,  Bishop  of 
Limerick,  was  the  first  of  those  legates. 
He  waa  an  honor  to  his  country,  and  de- 
voted his  life  exclusively  to  re-establishing 
good  institutions.  St.  Mael-maedhog  suc- 
ceeded. On  h  s  departure  from  Borne  he 
had  received  a  stole  and  episcopal  mitre 
from  Pope  Innocent  II.  Christian,  Bishop 
of  Lismore,  was  next  appointed  by  Eugen- 
ius  III.  St.  Laurentius  succeeded  under 
the  pontificate  of  Alexander  III.;  and  Mat- 
thew, or  Maurice,  Archbishop  of  Caiseal, 
was  the  next.  They  were  all  Irishmen, 
and  therefore  better  qualified  than  any 
others  to  inflame  their  countrymen  with  a 
love  of  virtue,  to  censure  their  vices  with 
severity  and  to  stimulate  their  progress  in 
learning.  The  Irish,  who  were  so  very  re- 
mote from  the  court  of  Rome,  would  never 
have  been  entrusted  to  the  care  of  those 
legates  if  the  Popes  had  not  been  convinced 
that  they  were  eminently  qualified  for  the 
teaching  of  nations. 

The  zeal  of  the  Popes  for  the  reformation 
of  Ireland  appears  more  manifest  still  in  the 
appointment  of  subsidiary  and  extraordin- 
ary legates,  to  aid  the  preaching  of  the 
former  in  Ireland.  Three  Cardinals  were 
ordered  by  the  Pope  to  visit  Ireland  :  John 
Paparo,  Cardinal  priest  in  Damaso,  Vivian 
Tomasius,  and  John  of  Salernum.  Three 
thousand  bishops,  priests,  monks  and  can- 
ons, met  in  council  at  Keannanus  under 
Paparo,  ;  the  legatine  labors  of  Vivian, 
Cardinal  priest  of  St.  Stephen,  in  the  Cseh- 
an  Mount,  are  set  forth  in  another  part  of 
this  work.  John  of  Salernum.  who  was 
also  Cardinal  priest  of  St.  Stephen,  on  the 


Ctelian  Mount,  held  two  councils  in  the 
year  1202,  one  at  Dublin,  the  other  at  Ath- 
luain,  and  in  both  enacted  salutary  canons. 
From  the  office  of  the  translation  of  St. 
Patrick,  Briqhid,  and  Columba,  we  learn 
that  the  same  Cardinal,  "  with  all  due  ven- 
eration and  solemnity,  translated  the  said 
relics  in  the  church  of  St.  Patrick  at  Dun, 
from  the  place  where  they  were  buried. 
At  this  ceremony  of  translation  there  were 
present,  with  the  legate  in  St.  Patrick's 
Church,  fifteen  bishops,  together  with  ab- 
bots, dignitaries,  deans,  archdeacons,  and 
an  immense  number  of  faithful  believers." 

Ussher  believed  that  this  legate's  name 
waa  Vivian,  but  this  grievous  error  arose, 
probably,  from  the  fact  that  both  were 
Cardinals  of  the  same  title.  After  the 
death  of  Vivian,  John  was  promoted  to  the 
same  office,  a  circumstance  which  led  Us- 
sher, though  generally  correct,  into  the 
mistake.  Cardinal  Bellarminus  certainly 
states  that  there  were  several  Cardinals  of 
the  title  of  St.  Stephen  in  Mount  Ceeli  > 
about  that  period.  While  John  resided  aa 
legate  in  Ireland,  he  received  letters  from 
Innocent  III.,  and  our  annals  also  record 
that  James,  the  Pope's  penitentiary  or 
chaplain,  was  exercising  legatine  authority 
in  Ireland  about  the  year  1220."  I  had  al- 
most forgotten  the  Italian  Giraldus,  an 
ecclesiastic  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  "  who 
was  sent  over  to  those  parts  with  legatine 
powers,"  according  to  Cambrensis.  Car- 
dinal Othobon  was  also  legate  in  [reland, 
for  he  celebrated  at  London  a  great  council 
of  all  the  prelates  of  England,  Wales,  Scot- 
land and  Ireland  in  1268 

In  consequence  of  the  negligence  of  his- 
torians, we  have  fewer  records  of  legates  in 
Ireland  in  succeding  ages.  Matthew  of 
Westminster  states  that  Peter  de  Sufflein 
was  legate  in  Ireland  in  1240  and  John 
Rufus  in  1247.  Stanihurst  also  records  in 
his  English  history  of  Ireland,  that  a  great 
quarrel  having  arisen  between  the  citizens 
of  Dublin  and  the  retainers  of  the  Earl  of 
Ormonde,  the  citizens  burst  in  a  body  into 
St.  Patrick's  Cathedral,  where  the  Earl  had 
taken  refuge,  and  attempted  to  kill  him. 
They  cast  their  javelins  against  the  images 
of  the  saints,  threw  down  the  statues,  dese- 
crated the  relics,  and  most  profanely  viol- 
ated the  holy  place.  Ormonde  appealed  to 
the  Holy  See  to  punish  this  sacrilege,  and  a 
legate  was  immediately  sent  over  to  punish 
the  delinquents  according  to  their  deserts. 
But  at  the  earnest  request  of  Walter  Fitz- 
simon,  Archbishop  of  Dublin,  and  other 
prelates,  the  citizens  were  pardoned  on  this 
condition,  that  the  "  Mayor  of  the  city,  as 
a  perpetual  commemoration  of  the  thing, 
should  w.lk  barefooted  every  year  in  the 
solemn  procession  on  Corpus  Christi."  And 
that  was  faithfully  observed  until  the 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


149 


Catholic   religion  waa    abolished    by    law. 

After  the  death  of  Henry  VIII.  and  Ed- 
ward VI.,  the  Church  recovered  her  former 
power  and  splendor  under  the  reign  of 
Queen  Mary.  Cardinal  Pole  was  then  ap- 
pointed legate,  both  for  England  and  Ire- 
land (as  appears  from  the  letters  of  the 
King  and  Queen  in  Reymer),  but  he  never 
entered  Ireland  ;  but  when  Elizabeth  suc- 
ceeded to  the  throne  of  both  kingdoms  the 
Church  was  once  more  deprived  of  power 
and  almost  totally  destroyed,  whence  there 
were  but  few  legates  in  Ireland  during  her 
reign.  Alphonsus  Salmero,  of  the  Society 
of  Jesus,  was,  however,  a  nuncio  apostolic 
in  Ireland,  according  to  Ribadeneira's 
41  Writers  of  the  Society  of  Jesus,"  I  also 
saw  a  dispensation  granted  by  David  Wolf, 
of  Limerick,  to  Richard  Lynch,  a  citizen  of 
Galway,  grandfather  to  Nicholas  Lynch, 
provincial  of  the  Irish  Dominicans,  who 
died  at  Romo  about  twenty  years  ago, 
deeply  regretted  by  his  friends.  The  dis- 
pensation was  signed  by  David  Wolf,  apos- 
tolic nuncio.  Orlandinus  speaks  of  him  in 
his  history  of  the  Society  of  Jesus.  I  have 
learned  that  he  was  a  man  of  extraordinary 
piety  who  fearlessly  denounced  crime  when- 
ever it  was  committed.  When  the  whole 
country  was  embroiled  in  war  he  took 
refuge  in  the  castle  of  Clunoan,  on  the 
borders  of  Thomond  and  of  the  county  of 
Galway,  but  when  he  heard  that  its  occu- 
pants lived  by  plunder,  he  believed  it  a  sin 
to  take  any  nourishment  from  them,  and 
sickened  and  died. 

The  relentless  cruelty  of  Elizabeth  against 
all  ecclesiastics  could  not  deter  that  great 
man,  Nicholas  Sanders,  from  nobly  dis- 
charging the  lega  ine  functions  in  Ireland. 
He  not  only  devoted  himself  to  the  punctual 
discharge  of  his  duties,  but  even  sacrificed 
his  life  as  himself  had  anticipated.  Thadanis 
Egan  succeeded  him  as  legate.  He  was 
assassinated  while  he  was  in  the  act  of 
exhorting  the  soldiers  on  the  day  of  battle 
to  fight  bravely  for  the  Catholic  religion. 
After  a  long  interval,  Father  Francis  Scar- 
ampi,  a  man  of  noble  rank  and  great  virtue, 
a  priest  of  the  Oratory,  came  to  Ireland  by 
order  of  Urban  VIII.  Some  time  after 
John  Baptist  Rinnucinni,  Archbishop  and 
Prince  of  Fermo,  came  as  extraordinary 
legate  to  Ireland  from  Innocent  X.,  and 
was  received  with  transports  of  joy  by  the 
Irish.  He  spared  neither  labor  nor  ex- 
pense to  raise  Ireland  from  her  prostrate 
condition,  but  the  evil  genius  of  the  land 
blasted  his  exertions  and  the  fond  hopes  of 
the  Irish. 

Moreover,  while  heresy  in  its  rampant 
atrocity  was  clouding  the  splendor  of  the 
true  faith,  all  the  Popes  for  the  time  being 
sent  over  many  learned  men  as  lamps  to 
dispel  that  great  darkness  ;  and  if  they 


removed  not  altogether  those  clouds  of 
error,  they  at  least  succeeded  happily  in 
preventing  them  from  remaining  on  the 
minds  of  most  of  the  natives.  And  that 
the  Popes  should  leave  no  means  untried 
that  could  be  desired  for  sustaining  the 
Catholic  religion  in  Ireland,  Innocent  X. 
sent  over,  in  our  own  days,  a  large  quantity 
of  money  for  the  restoration  of  the  faith, 
as  Gregorius  XIII.  had,  in  our  fathers' 
time,  sent  over  an  army  raised  at  great  ex- 
pense, to  assist  the  Irish,  and  save  religion 
from  the  total  destruction  to  which  it  waa 
then  exposed. 

But  what  need  of  more  1  There  were 
only  two  archbishoprics  in  England  and  two 
in  Scotland,  that  is  four  in  Great  Britain, 
established  by  the  Popes,  though  Great 
Britain,  according  to  Caesar's  estimate,  is 
twice  as  large  as  Ireland.  Religious  worth, 
not  extent  of  territory,  made  them  place 
Ireland  on  a  level  with  a  country  so  far 
superior  in  extent.  For  the  same  reasons 
the  Popes  have  not  appointed  Bishops  to 
the  Episcopal  Sees  of  England,  Scotland, 
Denmark,  Sweden,  Norway,  and  other  king- 
doms which  revolted  against  the  Church 
and  the  papal  authority  ;  though  an  almost 
uninterrupted  succession  of  illustrious  Bish- 
ops has  been  appointed  in  almost  all  Irish 
Sees,  even  while  the  government  was  ex- 
clusively in  the  hands  of  the  heretics. 

If,  then,  St.  Gregorius  has  been  justly 
styled  by  Beda  the  Apostle  of  England, 
because  he  commissioned  Augustinus  and 
his  companions  to  emancipate  the  English 
from  the  darkness  of  paganism,  how  great 
and  powerful  are  the  bonds  between  the 
Irish  and  those  Popes,  who  not  only  la- 
bored strenuously  in  pouring  out  on  them 
the  full  light  of  faith,  but  also  in  preserving, 
at  all  times,  that  faith  when  once  planted, 
and  rooting  it  deeply  in  their  hearts,  and 
diffusing  it  more  and  more,  sometimes  by 
the  public  ministry  of  papal  delegates,  more 
frequently  by  the  secret  missions  of  learned 
men,  and  at  times  by  military  aid  to  assist 
their  righteous  resistance  to  the  destruction 
which  threatened  the  country.  To  the 
Popes,  therefore,  Ireland  owes  not  only  the 
ornaments  of  her  dignity,  but  much  more, 
the  elements  of  her  constancy. 

Should  it  be  objected  that  I  was  seduced 
by  a  false  love  of  country  to  assert,  without 
grounds,  that  Ireland  was  never  visited  by 
the  censures  of  the  Pope,  I  answer  that  if 
the  documents  produced  against  me  be  sub- 
mitted to  a  serious  examination,  it  will 
clearly  appear  that  the  thunders  of  the 
Church  were  never  launched  against  Ireland : 
"It  is  evident,"  they  say,  "from  the  letters 
of  St.  Gregorius  and  the  life  of  St.  Kilian, 
that  Ireland  was  often  cut  off  from  the 
Church  by  censures."  But  let  us  examine 
both  assertions  separately  ;  and  commencin 


150 


THK       POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


with  St.  Gregorius,  I  maintain  his  two  let- 
ters were  not  directed  to  the  Irish,  but  to 
the  Iberians,  a  people  of  Asia,  between 
Albania  and  Colchis,  and  at  present  a  part 
of  western  Georgia.  The  MMS.  copy  of 
the  second  letter  in  the  Vatican  library 
reads  "  Iberia,"  not  "H.bernia."  By  the 
negligence  of  transcribers  one  letter  was 
added  and  afterwards  printed  ;  and  thus 
the  affairs  of  two  distant  nations,  having  no 
connection  with  each  other,  were  jumbled 
and  confounded.  This  circumstance,  and 
other  arguments  which  I  am  about  to  ad- 
duce, leave  no  doubt  on  my  mind  that  both 
the  letters  were  addressed  to  the  Iberians, 
and  not  to  the  Irish. 

An  error,  sin  i'ar  to  that  in  St.  Gregori- 
us's,  has  also  crept  into  the  writings  of 
others  Thus,  Rufinus  relates  that  a  ser- 
vant maid,  a  Christian,  converted  the  King 
of  Iberia,  and  then  his  whole  people,  from 
the  darkness  of  paganism  to  the  light  of 
Christian  faith.  The  fact  is  thus  recorded 
in  the  Roman  Marty  rology  :  "In  Iberia, 
beyond  the  Euxine  Sea.  the  festival  of  a 
holy  Christian  maid,  who,  by  her  miraculous 
powers,  converted  that  nation  to  the  faith 
of  Christ  in  the  time  of  Conatantinus. "  But 
preceding  writers,  by  a  gross  blunder,  apply 
to  the  Irish  Church  the  establishment  of 
Christianity  among  the  Iberians.  Philip- 
pus  of  Bergamo  says  "that  an  humble 
Christian  woman,  being  carried  a  slave  into 
Ireland,  established  the  faith  of  Christ  in 
that  country/'  He  adds,  however,  that 
"those  Iberians  are  called  Gregorions  at 
present,  and  form  but  one  province  or  ter- 
ritory with  the  Armenians  and  Colchians." 
Thua,  though  he  writes  the  word  Hibernia, 
he  gives  us  clearly  to  understand  th«t  he 
means  Iberia.  Is  it  surprising,  then,  that 
Sabellicus,  who  adopts  this  history  on  the 
authority  of  Philipius,  should  have  applied 
it  to  Ireland.  Hector  Boethius  copies  not 
only  the  facts,  but  the  very  words  of  Sabel- 
licus, but  makes  one  little  addition  of  his 
own,  namely,  that  this  woman,  of  whose 
country  the  others  are  silent,  was  a  Pict. 
He  appeals  for  that  circumstance  "to  the 
Scotic  annals,  but  Dempster  grounds  it  on 
Irish  tradition."  The  discrepancy  in  their 
testimony  proves  that  vague  rumor,  which 
the  credulous  always  exaggerate,  was  the 
sole  ground  for  their  statements. 

Arnold  Pontanus  must  have  also  been  mis- 
led by  confounding  those  names,  when  he 
writes,  "that  the  Iberians  were  converted 
to  the  faith  of  Christ  by  the  preaching  of  St. 
Patrick."  Again,  in  the  words  of  St. 
Hieronimus,  "he  won  over  Iberia  to 
Christ."  Iberia  ia  read  by  some  Hibernia, 
as  Erasmus  observed.  Hence  arose  the  er- 
ror of  Arnold  Merriman,  grounded  on  the 
common  editions  of  E  use  bins,  that  Galba 
had  extended  his  empire  to  Ireland;  and 


again,  in  the  life  of  St.  Firmin,  Pampeluna, 
a  city  of  Iberia  or  Spain,  is  set  down  as  be- 
ing in  Ireland;  Vincent  also,  misled  by  con- 
founding the  words  Hibernia  and  Iberia,  as 
Ussher  thinks,  "states  that  St.  James  vis- 
ited the  coasts  of  Ireland."  But  as  in  the 
last  copy  of  the  last  epistle  of  St.  Grego- 
rius, the  word  is  written  "  Iberia,"  and  as 
the  first  was  certainly  directed  to  the  same 
country,  both  were  evidently  sent,  not  to 
the  Irish,  but  to  the  Iberians. 

In  the  concluding  chapter  of  the  fourth 
volume  of  his  Cambrensis  Eversus,  Dr. 
Lynch  gives  a  brief  summary  of  the  princi- 
pal points  contained  in  this  valuable  work, 
and  then  he  thus  scores  the  slanderous  Gir- 
aldus  Cambrensia  for  the  foulness  of  the 
falshoods  which  he  ei  her  fabricated  himself 
in  order  to  gratify  his  anti- Irish  venom,  or 
which  he  heard  from  the  traductive  tongues 
of  some  hirelings  like  himself,  who  deemed 
it  an  honor  to  fulminate  falsehood,  because 
thereby  they  could  calumniate  the  Irish  peo- 
ple and  damage  the  reputation  of  the  great- 
est and  most  loyal  Catholic  nation  the  world 
has  ever  witnessed. 

The  object  of  my  labor  has,  I  think, 
been  now  obtained.  Truth,  which  can  of- 
ten defend  herself  without  aid  against  the 
craft  and  ingenuity  of  man,  has  been  brought 
to  light  from  under  the  hoar  of  centuries 
which  enveloped  her.  She  cannot  be 
crushed  by  the  might  of  calumny,  nor  over- 
whelmed by  the  length  of  time,  nor  extin  • 
guished  by  all  the  efforts  of  violence;  the 
more  vehemently  and  bitterly  she  is  assailed, 
the  more  majestically  does  she  rise,  like  the 
palm  the  which  has  been  weighed  to  the 
ground.  In  vain  has  Giraldus  endeavored 
to  defile  her  with  his  bitter  calumnies; 
these  dissertations  have  removed  all  his  foul 
colorings,  and  she  rises  on  our  view  with 
more  .than  her  pristine  brilliancy.  "Great 
is  the  power  of  truth,  which  can  easily  and 
without  aid  defend  herself  against  all  the 
intellect  and  craft,  and  cunning  and  con- 
cocted conspiracies  of  men. "  The  very  title 
of  his  first  work — "Topography,"  was  a  lie. 
Through  the  whole  course  of  his  work  there 
is  not  even  a  shadowy  sketch  of  the  subjects 
signified  by  that  title. 

He  had  the  audacity  to  commit  a  similar 
disgraceful  error  in  entitling  that  work  of 
his  "  The  Conquest  of  Ireland,"  the  book 
itself  not  containing  the  least  realization  of 
what  its  title  promises.  The  conquest  of 
Ireland  was  not  completed  for  several  hun- 
dred years  after  the  death  of  Giraldus. 
Thus  he  sticks  in  the  very  port  which  por- 
tends certain  shipwreck,  when  he  launches 
out  into  the  great  ocean  of  Irish  history,  es- 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


151 


pecially  when  he  was  not  well  provided  with 
those  aids  which  would  enable  him  to  con- 
struct his  projected  fabric.  Chronology  he 
neglected;  and  where  its  cynosure  is  want- 
ing, there  can  be  but  blind  sailing  on 
the  deep  of  history.  For  some  persons 
maintain  that  accurate  chronology  is  the 
only  eye  of  history;  and  as  that  eye  is 
wanting  in  the  history  of  Cambrensis,  it 
must  be  "a  horrid,  shapeless,  and  sightless 
monster. "  An  evident  proof  of  the  defect- 
iveness  of  his  chronology  is,  that  he  makes 
'•  St.  Columba  and  St.  Brigid  contempora- 
ries of  St.  Patrick,"  though  he  had  pre- 
viously stated  that  St.  Patrick  had  rested  in 
the  Lord  in  458  (which  Colgan  proves  ought 
to  be  493),  that  St.  Columba,  who  died  in 
or  near  Jhe  year  496,  was  not  born  before 
the  year  519.  and  that  St  Brigid  departed 
to  heaven  about  the  year  523.  What  could 
be  expected  from  a  stranger  who  knew  noth- 
ing of  Irish  affairs  nor  the  Irish  language, 
without  which  a  knowledge  of  the  records  of 
Ireland  could  not  be  acquired,  and  who 
spent  only  two  years  in  collecting  the  ma- 
terials for  his  work,  without  visiting,  in  the 
meantime,  hardly  one-third  of  the  island  1 
The  only  witnesses  cited  as  his  authorities 
were  generally  his  own  countrymen,  the 
principal  of  whom  were  overwhelmed  in 
debt  at  home,  and  had  broken  faith  with 
their  creditors,  and  therefore  may  be  fairly 
pronounced  unworthy  of  much  credit  abroad. 
Many  of  the  statements  in  his  book  were 
taken  from  a  different  class  of  his  country- 
men, namely,  sailors,  common  soldiers,  rob- 
bers, incendiaries,  debauchees,  and  murder- 
ers, and,  in  fine,  from  the  dregs  and  refuse 
of  the  people,  the  outcasts  and  disgrace  of 
human  society.  He  caught  up  with  greedy 
ears  the  rumors  of  lying  report,  and  pro- 
posed them  to  the  belief  of  mankind  as 
gravely  as  if  they  had  been  pronounced  by 
oracles.  Other  facts  he  records,  to  which 
he  says  he  was  himself  an  eye  witness.  He 
culled  the  most  discreditable  facts  from  the 
Irish  annals,  and  suppressed  those  that  emi- 
nently deserved  to  be  recorded — like  the 
leech  which  sucks  out  corruption,  but  leaves 
the  sound  humors  untouched.  Is  not  a 
work  raised  on  such  frail  foundations  obvi- 
ously tottering  to  ruin  ?  especially  when  he 
who  attempted  to  raise  the  structure  was 
turbulent  and  quarrelsome,  and  a  diviner, 
and  crediting  dreams  and  auguries,  shame- 
fully parading  his  own  panegyric,  and  im- 
moderate in  his  eulogy  of  his  friends,  as  he 
was  merciless  in  vituperating  his  enemies, 
and  contradicting  himself  as  well  as  others, 
and  never  recited  with  praise  by  any  respect- 
able author,  and  the  most  vapid  enemy  of 
the  Irish.  What  calm  sense  could  be  ex- 
pected from  a  firebrand,  or  fair  statement 
from  a  litigant,  or  consistency  from  a  divi- 
ner, or  solidity  from  a  dreamer  1 — what  but 


visionary  folly  and  insincerity  from  a  sooth- 
sayer and  a  boaster  ?  — what  truth  could  be 
expected  from  the  slave  of  prejudice— what 
consistency  from  the  fickle — what  worth 
from  the  contemptible— what  justice  from  an 
enemy — a  man  who  labored  to  patch  up  his 
case  with  variegated  shreds  of  equity,  like 
seasonings  of  rancid  meat  ?  When  bulrush 
columns  support  a  marble  palace,  then  you 
may  expect  a  fair  history  from  a  man  blasted 
by  such  defects  !  If  the  vanity  of  dreams 
and  the  divinations  of  augurs  can  command 
the  implicit  belief  of  an  historian,  must  not 
everyone  suspect  that  a  similar  weakness  de- 
stroys all  the  credit  of  his  narratives  ? 

But  these  are  not  the  only  blemishes 
which  exclude  him  from  the  rank  of  credit- 
able historians.  Historians  are  bound  as 
strictly  not  to  suppress  things  worthy  of  rec- 
ord as  not  to  state  falsehoods  in  their  history. 
Now  Giraldus,  after  promising  a  complete 
history  of  Ireland,  suppressed  not  trifles 
merely  or  inconsiderable  events,  but  the 
most  capital  points  of  history.  He  has  sup- 
pressed not  only  the  deeds  but  even  the 
names  of  the  kings  of  Ireland.  It  would 
not  suit  his  purpose  to  have  even  the  names 
of  kings  glittering  in  the  pages  of  a  work, 
which  was  intended  to  be  tilled  with  the  til- 
thy  and  discreditable  practices  of  the  Irish  ; 
his  sole  object  being  to  collect  from  all 
quarters  into  one  mass  whatever  was  dis- 
graceful to  them,  and  to  find  matter  for  cal- 
umny in  their  soil,  and  sea  and  climate,  as- 
serting falsely  that  the  climate  was  excess- 
ively severe,  the  sea  torn  by  eternal  tem- 
pests, and  the  land  swamped  by  extraordin- 
ary humidity.  So  inveterate  was  his  lust 
for  calumny,  that  he  should  reproach  us 
with  the  small  size  of  our  cattle,  and  the 
black  color  of  our  sheep.  *  *  *  *  The 
bulls  of  Adrian  IV.  and  Alexander  HI.  he 
falsely  imagined  gave  grounds  for  his  cal- 
umnies, those  bulls  being  either  entirely 
spurious  or  surreptitiously  obtained  by  the 
fradulent  and  secret  machinations  of  the  cal- 
umniators. The  filthy  practices  falsely  im- 
puted to  the  Irish  in  these  bulls  were  exag- 
gerated and  multiplied  by  Giraldus,  who 
magnified  flies  into  elephants,  and  atoms 
into  mountains ;  but  he  was  building  on 
sand  when  he  labored  to  rear  the  fabric  of 
his  own  calumnies  on  those  false  documents, 
the  bulls  being  one  tissue  of  unfounded 
stories,  utterly  at  variance  with  truth,  and, 
if  attentively  examined,  outrageously  op- 
posed to  the  laws  both  of  God  and  man,  be- 
cause they  condemned  the  innocent  without 
a  hearing  to  the  most  frightful  punishment, 
and  were  full  of  many  other  intolerable  de- 
fects. 

*        *        ***** 

I  appeal  now  to  the  judgment  of  every 
candid  reader,  whether  I  have  not  estab- 
lished, that  no  credit  can  be  given  to  the 


152 


THE       POPE       AND      IHELAXD. 


writings  of  a  man  who  was  morose  and  quar- 
relsome, a  diviner  and  a  believer  in  sooth- 
sayers, a  flatterer,  and  vainglorious  pane- 
gyrUt  of  himself  and  his  friends  :  who  con- 
sulted his  prejudices  and  not  truth  in  his 
writings ;  who  recorded  what  should  have 
been  suppressed,  and  suppressed  what  should 
have  been  recorded  ;  who  was  opprobrious 
to  his  adversaries  and  calumnious  against  his 
enemies ;  who  reconciles  impossibilities, 
publishes  falsehoods,  and  has  often  concealed 
the  truth  ;  who  disgorged  his  filthy  calum- 
nies against  the  whole  Irish  people,  sparing 


neither  the  tender  years  of  the  child,  nor 
the  sex  of  the  woman  ;  ridiculed  the  com- 
monalty, libelled  the  noble,  insolently  de- 
spised the  princes  and  king*,  carped  at  the 
clergy,  lacerated  the  prelates,  aimed  a  mor- 
tal blow  at  the  Church  Militant  herself,  and 
hurled  his  calumnies,  even  to  the  court  of 
heaven,  against  the  saints  of  Ireland.  Such, 
alas !  is  the  fate  of  all  things  ;  when  they 
once  begin  to  totter,  there  is  no  stay  to  their 
fall  till  they  sink  to  the  lowest  depths  of 
ruin. 


CHAPTER       XXVIII. 


Farther  Historical  Proofs  Concerning  the  Letter  which  Pope  Adraiu  IV.,  sent  to 
King  Louis  VII. — Evidence  Showing  the  Letter  to  have  Alluded  to  Ireland 
and  not  to  Spain,  as  Claimed  by  Anti-Catholic  Writers. 


Having  now  given  the  evidence  of  the 
celebrated  Dr.  Lynch,  as  recorded  in 
preceding  chapters,  we  will  turn  again  to 
the  Analecta  Juris  Pontificii  of  Victor 
Palme,  in  order  to  adduce  some  ad  litional 
testimony  from  the  fruitful  pen  of  this 
most  recent —and,  we  may  add,  most  suc- 
cessful, writer  of  modern  days  among  all 
who  have  attempted  to  treat  of  this  in- 
tricate historical  question. 

M.  Palme,  in  his  Adrian  IV.  and 
Irdind,*  has  left  nothing  unsaid  on  this 
subject.  He  has  viewed  this  long- disputed 
historical  question  from  every  standpoint, 
and  he  has  advanced  arguments  and 
presented  documents  which  throw  new 
light  upon  the  subject  and  which  can- 
uut  fail  to  convince  every  candid-minded 
reader  that  the  Bulls  in  question  were 
most  assuredly  forged.  In  the  introduc- 
tory remarks  to  his  exhaustive  essay  M. 
Palme  says  : 

Wo  know  of  no  historical  document 
which  has  evoked  so  many  controversies 
as  the  Letter  of  Pope  Adrian  IV., 
authorizing,  it  is  said,  Henry  II.,  King  of 
England,  to  undertake  the  conquest  of  Ire- 
land, and  ordering  the  Irish  to  submit  to 
that  prince  as  their  legitimate  master. 

'Published  in  the  year  1882  in  the  Analecta 
in  Paria,  of  which  &£.  Palme*  i«  the  distinguished 
editor. 


For  seven  hundred  years  the  Irish 
have  questioned  the  authenticity  of  the 
Papal  Letter.  They  could  not  be  per- 
suaded into  the  belief  that  the  common 
Father  of  Christendom  had,  without  con- 
sulting the  clergy  and  the  people  of  the 
country,  without  being  informed  as  to 
whether  the  intervention  of  the  English 
prince  was  solicited  or  desired  by  the 
parties  most  concerned,  condemned— on 
an  incomplete  and  inexact  statement  of 
affairs — a  nation  distinguished  for  its  at- 
tachment to  Christianity,  to  forfeit  its  in- 
dependence and  to  become  the  prey  of  the 
covetous  and  ferocious  Anglo-Normans. 

This  train  of  thought  has  been  developed 
with  a  great  deal  of  warmth  and  bitterness 
by  Abbe  MacGeoghegan,  as  the  following 
words  show  : 

The  above  (the  letter  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.) 
was  an  edict  pronounced  against  Ireland,  by 
which  the  rights  of  men  and  the  most  sacred 
laws  were  violated,  under  the  specious  pretext  of 
religion  and  the  reformation  of  morals.  The 
Irish  were  no  longer  to  possess  a  country. 
That  people  who  had  never  bent  under  a  foreign 
yoke  (  nunquam  ext'.rnaesubjacuitditioni  )  were 
condemned  to  lose  their  liberty  without  even 
being  heard.  *  *  *  *  It  may  be  well  affirm- 
ed that  no  Pope,  either  before  or  since  Adrian 
IV.,  ever  punished  a  nation  so  severely  without 
cause.  We  have  seen  instances  of  Popes  mak- 
ing use  of  their  spiritual  authority  in  opposition 
to  crowned  beads ;  we  have  known  them  to 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


153 


excommunicate  emperors  and  kings,  and  to 
place  their  States  under  an  interdict,  for  crimes 
of  heresy  or  other  causes  ;  but  we  here  behold 
innocent  Ireland  given  up  to  tyrants,  with  mt 
having  been  summoned  before  any  tribunal,  or 
conviuted  of  any  crime.''f 

Furthermore,  Irish  writers  have  at  all 
times  laid  particular  stress  upon  the  fact 
that  the  original  diploma  of  Pope  Adrian 
has  never  been  seen  or  produced  by  anybody  ; 
that  it  was  not  seen  or  exhibited  by  any- 
body at  the  period  when  it  was  first  men- 
tioned or  referred  to,  that  is,  towards  the 
close  of  the  twelfth  century,  and  that  no 
annalist  or  historian— from  that  time  for- 
wards— has  bem  able  to  say  that  he  saw  the 
original  document  or  quoted  from  it.  So 
true  is  all  this  that  Rymer,  who  took  the 
greatest  care  with  regard  to  every  document 
of  the  Fcedera,  to  cite  on  the  margin  the 
autographs  ex  Turre  Londonensi,  or  from 
some  other  official  Registry,  found  himself 
compelled,  in  respect  to  this  Letter  of 
Adrian  IV.,  to  cite  as  a  guarantee  only 
Matthew  Paris,  who  lived  about  a  century 
after  Adrian. 

It  is  true  that  Cardinal  Baronius  has  in- 
serted in  his  Ecclesiastical  Annals  the  Let 
ter  attributed  to  Pope  Adrian  ;  but  the 
manner  in  which  the  learned  annalist  ex- 
presses himself  shows  conclusively  that  he 
had  not  before  him  the  original  document, 
and,  consequently,  that  it  did  not  exist  in 
the  archives  of  the  Vatican  at  the  time  of 
Baronius.  In  fact  Baronius  does  not  give 
date,  year,  nor  day  of  the  Letter.  Other 
writers  have  dated  it  from  Rome, .  whilst  it 
is  proved  that  at  the  period  in  question 
Adrian  IV.  was  at  Benevento,  where  he 
dwelt  for  a  considerable  period  of  time. 
But  would  Baronius  have  neglected  to  affix 
the  name  of  the  place,  the  year  and  the  day 
of  the  Letter  (conditions  so  essential,  es- 
pecially to  an  important  document)  if  he 
had  before  him  the  official  Ktgestum  of 
Adrian  IV.,  or,  at  least,  an  authentic  tran- 
script of  the  Letter  1  From  this  it  is  clear 
that  he  had  in  his  possession,  or  under  his 
control,  only  a  private  copy  which  was  des- 
titute of  every  mark  of  authent  city. 

The  defenders  of  the  authenticity  of  the 
spurious  Adrian  document  agree  in  saying 

f  MacGeoghegan's  Hi.tory  of  Ireland,  p.  246. 


that  it  was  written  in  1155,  a  few  months 
after  the  flection  of  Pope  Adrian  IV. 
Baronius,  on  the  contrary,  places  the  docu- 
ment at  the  end  of  the  pontificate  of  the 
Pope,  and  declines  to  assume  any  responsi- 
bility with  regard  to  Us  date.  It  was  not 
because  Bironius  attached  any  importance 
to  the  document  that  he  inserted  it  in  his 
Annals,  but  simply  because  he  did  not 
wish  to  leave  out  anything  that  was  even 
attributed  to  so  illustrious  a  Pontiff. 
"Moreover,'  he  says,  in  alluding  to  this 
doubtful  diploma,  "  for  fear  that  anything 
should  perish  that  belongs  to  the  memory 
of  so  great  a  Pontiff,  we  here  transcribe 
from  a  manuscript  of  the  Vatican,  the 
diploma  given  to  Henry,  King  of  England, 
relating  to  the  affairs  of  Ireland,  restored 
to  a  better  condition  iu  respect  to  relig- 
ion "§ 

So  then,  Baronius  refrained  from  re- 
marking on  the  political  character  of  the 
Letter  which  has  been  for  so  long  regarded 
by  many  as  the  act  of  donation  of  Ireland 
to  the  English  king  ;  the  annalist  prefer- 
ring, on  tho  contrary,  to  call  attention 
only  to  the  amelioration  of  the  religious 
status  of  the  country. 

The  defenders  of  the  apocryphal  Letter 
attributed  to  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  imagine, 
no  doubt,  that  all  the  manuscripts  which 
are  kept  in  the  vast  library  of  the  Vatican, 
are  original  diplomas  and  official  collec- 
tions. They  also  pretend  that  it  was  from 
the  Vatican  itself,  and  from  a  Vatican 
manuscript  (ex  codice  Vaticano)  that  Bar- 
onius took  the  document  in  question.  But 
these  champions  of  the  authenticity  of 
Adrian's  Letter  are,  evidently,  not  aware 
that  the  Vatican  Library  contains  thous- 
ands of  manuscripts,  which,  beyond  a 
doubt,  have  no  official  or  authentic  char- 
acter. The  original  Eegesta  of  the  Popes 
are  preserved,  not  in  the  Library,  but  in 
the  archives  of  the  Vatican.  Furthermore, 
the  series  of  the  Regesta  commenced  only 
in  the  year  1198,  that  is,  jorty  years  after 

§  -Vrl  haec  insuper,  ne  quid  excidat  de  tanti 
poufcificis  memoria.  hie  describimua  ex  codice 
Vaticano  diploma  datum  ad  Henricum  Anglor- 
um  rfgem  de  rebus  Hibernite  in  meliorem  stat- 
utn  religionis  restitutis,  sed  quoto  sui  pontifi- 
catus  anno,  incertum.  Baronius,  Annates  Eccle* 
siastici,  torn.  12,  page  531.  Mognntiae,  1608. 


154 


THK      POPK       AND      IRELAND. 


the  death  of  Pcpe  Adrian  IV.  What, 
then,  is  the  Codtx  Vaticanvt  in  which 
Baronius  found  the  Letter  attributed  to 
Pope  Adrian  the  Fourth?  It  is  nothing 
more  than  a  copy  of  the  work  of  Mattfn  c 
Pom. 

In  1872  an  interesting  and  truthful 
article  on  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  and  his  pre- 
tended donation  of  Ireland  to  Henry  II  , 
appeared  in  the  Irish  Ecclesiastical  Record, 
wherein  the  author  states  that  during  a 
sojourn  of  several  years  in  Rome  he  made 
it  his  business  to  ascertain  what  the  manu- 
script of  the  Vatican  (codrx  Vaticaniis)  from 
which  was  taken  the  copy  of  Adrian's 
Letter,  amounted  to.  The  Archivist  of 
the  Vatican,  after  long  and  earnest  inves- 
tigation in  the  universal  Library,  attested 
that  Baronius  had  absolutely  'nothing  as  a 
foundation  for  the  Letter  in  the  Annals, 
sore  the  "Major  Bistoria"  of  Matthew  Paris. 

It  follows  then,  that  the  testimony  of 
the  Codex  Vaticanus,  and  that  of  B  ronius 
himself  who  used  it,  are  precisely  one  and 
the  same  with  that  of  Matthew  Paris,  that 
is,  the  testimony  of  a  historian  who  never 
saw  the  original  of  the  Letter,  and  who 
wrote  about  a  century  after  Adrian's  time. 
Here,  then,  we  have  another  confirmation 
of  the  fact  that  Cardinal  Baronius  dis- 
covered nowhere  in  the  Vatican  the  orig- 
inal Letter  of  Adrian  IV. ,  with  its  date 
and  other  marks  of  authenticity. 

It  now  remains  for  us  to  answer  an  ob- 
jection arising  from  the  fact  that  the 
Diploma  attributed  to  Pope  Adrian  has 
been  inserted  in  some  of  the  editions  of 
the  Bullarium  Romanum. 

The  learned  know  that  the  collection 
called  the  Bullarium  Romanum  was  a 
private  and  individual  undertaking  whose 
authenticity  the  Popes  have  not  guaranteed. 
It  was  quite  possible,  then,  for  apocryphal 
documents  to  gain  admittance  therein. 

When,  in  1234,  Pope  Gregory  IX.  pub- 
lished the  Decretals,  he  placed  at  their 
head  a  Papal  Diploma  authenticating  the 
collection. 

Popes  Boniface  VIII.  and  Clement  V. 
did  the  same  in  regard  to  other  Canonical 
codes.  Subsequently,  Leo  X.  declared 


authentic  the  Acts  of  the  Fifth  Council  of 
Late ran.  Pins  IV.  did  the  same  in  re- 
spect to  the  Decrees  <  f  the  Council  of 
Trent,  an  edition  of  which  was  brought  out 
in  Rome  in  1504.  Some  years  afterwards, 
Gregory  XI 11.  authenticated,  in  like  man- 
ner, the  Roman  edition  of  the  Corpus  juris 
Cunoiiici.  Under  the  pontificate  of  Pope 
Paul  V.,  the  great  editions  of  the  General 
Councils  was  brought  out  at  Rome,  but  it 
was  clearly  expressed  in  the  Preface  that 
the  work  laid  no  claim  to  official  and 
judical  authenticity. 

The  Holy  See  has  never  assumed  the 
responsibility  of  the  contents  of  the  differ- 
ent editions  of  the  Bullarium  Romanumt 
which  have,  at  various  per  ods,  been  pub- 
lished ;  hence  the  Bulh-||  and  Brief ^  in- 
serted therein  have  legal  value  only  in  so 
much  as  they  are  copies  or  transcripts  in 
the  authentic  form  and  with  all  the  other 
requisites. 

The  four  volumes  of  the  Bullar!um  of 
Pope  Benedict  XIV.  alone  form  an  ex- 
ception to  the  rule  just  stated,  because  that 
Supreme  Pontiff  authenticated  them  by  a 
Diploma  placed  at  the  head  of  the  collec- 
tionlf. 

IT  Remigius  Maschat,  Cl.  R-K.  S.  P.,  lays 
down  the  same  doctrine,  and  in  it  clearlv  voices 
the  sentiment  of  the  learned,  in  his  Intt:t"tioncs 
Canonical  vol.  2  part  1  ma..  pag  126.  NJ.  20. 

||  "  An  magnum  Bullarium  continent  Constitu- 
tionet  Pottificias  habeat  auitorttjlem  juris?' 
11.  Negative,  nisi  certo.  saltern  m»ra  iter.  con- 
stet.  quod  dictse  Oonotitutionew  rite  sint  pro- 
mulgate utu  recfptae  et  per  omnia  conformes  suo 
origina'i.  Hiuc  cr.ante  dubin  in  jiuiicio  mm 
probaiit,  nisi  pr.ducantur  in  forma  authentica. 
et  quidem  in  Cum  R  man  a  sub  Sigiho  Uan- 
cellarii,  vel  Camerarii,  Auditoris,  t  xtra  vero  sub 
plumbo  cum  consueta  Bnbncriptione.  Si  Breve 
seu  Diploma  apostolicum  eat.  plerun  que  consist 
brevi  Scriptura  in  papyro,  cera  rubru,  et  annulo 
piscatoris  sigilUta,  ac  signo  sfcrvt.rii  notata, 
et  suhscripta.  Si  Bulla  est.  scribitur  plerum- 
que  in  metnbrana  plumbo  e  funibua  pendetite 
munita,  nalutationem  cum  narrotioae,  et  con- 
cessions Pat  JE  continens." 

J"  BULLS,  so  called  from  the  seal,  whether  of 
gold,  silver  or  lead,  which  is  appended  to  them, 
begin  thus  :  LEO  (or  the  name  of  the  reigning 
Pontiff),  Episcopus,  Servus  Scrvortim  Dei. 

BHLEFS  begin  with  a  Buperacriutiou,  having 
the  name  of  the  reigning  Pontiff  thus:  LEO 
P.  P.  XIIl.  Formerly  Bulls  had  appended,  on 
a  ailken  or  hempen  cord,  a  leaden  (sometimes 
silver  or  even  gold)  seal,  and  were,  moreover, 
written  up->n  thick,  coarse  and  somewhat  dark 
parchment,  in  old  style  or  Teutonic  letters,  and 
without  any  punctuation.  At  present,  accord- 
ing to  a  mot  us  proprius  of  Pope  Leo  XIII.,  now 
happily  reigning,  issued  December  29th,  1878, 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


155 


CHAPTER       XXIX. 

Ciiticism  on  the  True  Letter  of   Pope    Adrian    IV.,    und    the    False    Bull. — Reasons 
Why  the  Letter  "H"  alludes  to  Hibernia  and  could  not  mean  Hispania. 


In  the  concluding  summary  of  his  exhaus- 
tive criticism  on  the  Letter  written  by  Pope 
Adrian  IV.,  to  King  Louis  VII.,  of  France 
and  Henry  II  ,  of  England,  M.  Palme  thus 
epitomizes  the  reasons  which  impelled  him 
to  believe  that  Letter  to  have  alluded  to 
Ireland  and  not  to  Spain. 

THE  XBUE  LETTER  AND  THE   FALSE  BULL. 

1. — Adrian  IV.,  never  conceded  to  the 
King  of  England  authorization  to  invade 
Ireland.  On  the  contrary,  he  positively 
refused  to  have  anything  to  do  with  the 
undertaking,  the  danger  and  injustice  of 
which  he  pointed  out  in  a  moat  signal 
manner. 

2  — The  Letter  commonly  attributed  to 
Pope  Adrian  is  spurious  or  apocryphal. 
This  conclusion  follows  necessarily  from 
the  foregoing,  independently  of  all  reasons 
that  concur  to  prove  the  spuriousness  of  that 
document. 

3. — The  true  Letter  of  Adrian,  in  which 
he  peremptorily  refustd  to  allow  Ireland  to 
be  invaded,  is  not  !o*t  ;  it  has  been  pre- 
served by  safe,  authorized  and  irrefutable 
witnesses. 

4. — The  tenor  of  the  true  Letter  itself 
does  not  allow  a  shadow  of  suspicion  to  fall 
on  its  authenticity,  whilst  the  extrinsic 
proofs  combine  to  render  wonderfully  clear 
and  potent  the  intrinsic. 

5. — This  true  Letter  of  Pope  Adrian  IV., 
by  itself  furnishes  the  key  to  the  proper 
understanding  of  a  great  number  of  facts 

the  use  of  the  Teutonic  characters  ia  entirely 
abolished,  and  the  ordinary  Latin  mode  of  writ- 
ing is  substituted.  The  use  of  the  leaden  seal  is 
restricted  to  the  more  important  Bulls.  The 
other  Balls,  like  Briefs,  have  a  red  seal  im- 
pressed, and  are  written  on  fine  white  parch- 
ment. The  n«w  red  seal  of  Bulls— as  prescribed 
by  Pope  Leo  XIII. — bears  on  its  face  the  im- 
ages of  SS.  Peter  and  Paul,  surrounded  by  the 
name  of  the  reigning  Pope."-  Smith's  Ecc. 
Law.  vol.  I.,  chap.  3  ,  art.  5.  no.  48. 

See  also  K  mings  Theolojice  Moralis,  S.  Al- 
phonsi  Coujp.  pt.  2;  No.  175;  pp.  73-4.  Fer- 
raris, verbum,  Cancellaria. 

Consult  especially  Devoti's  Instttutionum  (Jan- 
onicarum.  Tom.  1.  cap.  vii  §§  xcv-cii.,  but  par- 
ticularly §§  xcviii.  and  xcix.  pp.  88-9. 


that  have  hitherto  remained  dark,  inexplica- 
ble and  enigmatical.  It  unveils  the  motive 
of  the  mysterious  silence  that  was  kept  j'of 
more  than  twenty  years  on  the  existence 
of  a  supposed  act  of  Adrian  IV.  relating 
to  Ireland  It  explains  why  Henry  II. 
caused  that  country  to  be  attacked  fir«t  by 
adventurers ;  for  the  refusal  of  the  Pope 
to  concur  in  his  scheme  at  once  blocked  eceiy 
direct  and  open  invasion  of  the  country. 

6. — The  spurious  Le  ter  was  forged  on 
the  true  one.  Henry  II.  preserved  in  the 
apocryphal  Bull  the  preamble  of  the  lr»e 
Letter,  but  he  completely  changed  the  enact- 
ing part.  In  place  of  the  refusal  on  the 
part  of  the  Pope  to  have  anything  to  do 
with  the  scheme  of  the  invasion  of  Ireland, 
he  inserted  the  dona.ti.on  of  Ireland,  and  an 
exhortation  to  the  Irish  to  recognize  the 
King  of  England  as  their  Lord  and  Master. 
The  falsification  is  flagrant. 

7  —Not  one  of  the  successors  of  Adrian 
IV.,  in  the  Papacy,  confirmed  his  pretended 
donation.  It  is  true  that  in  the  treatise  of 
Giraldus  Cambrensis,  entitled  Expugnatio 
Hibernice,  we  find  a  Brief  attributed  to 
Alexander  III.,  but  that  historian  acknowl- 
edged in  good  faith,  in  a  subsequent  work, 
that  the  Brief  just  referred  to  had  been  pur- 
posely forged. 

THE  LETTER     "H->    MEANS    HIBERNIA. 

In  the  Middle  Ages  the  Chancellors  who 
transcribed  Papal  Diplomas,  had  the  habit 
— sometimes  very  annoying  to  modern 
writers — of  giving  simply  the  initials  of 
proper  names.  This  hibit  may  be  con- 
stantly noticed  in  the  very  Regesta  pre- 
served in  the  Archives  of  the  Vatican. 

The  ancient  manuscripts  which  have 
preserved  to  us  Pope  Adrian's  Letter  (which 
we  have  already  placed  before  our  readers) 
does  not  designate  the  country  to  which  it 
has  reference,  except  by  the  initial  '"H." 
But  the  tenor  itself  of  this  important  docu- 
ment clearly  points  out  marks  by  which  we 
are  enabled  to  recognize  at  once,  and  beyond 
all  doubt,  the  country  to  which  it  relates. 
I  say  that  the  Letter  of  Pope  Adrian  IV., 


166 


THE       POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


relates  to  Ireland  (Hibtrnia)  whose  conquest 
Louis  VII  ,  and  Henry  II.,  wished  to  bring 
about,  and  that  it  it  not  possible  to  app'y 
that  document  to  any  other  country,  nor  to 
any  other  affair  than  its  conquest. 

The  following  marks,  clearly  designated 
in  the  Papal  Letter,  show  that  it  is  Ireland 
alone  of  which  there  is  question  in  that 
document 

1. — The  country  of  which  there  is  ques- 
tion is  not  a  kingdom,  a  political  society 
which  is  in  the  possession  of  that  eminent 
dignity.  Adrian  IV.,  constantly  calls  it  by 
the  name  of  country.  Mark  his  expres- 
sions :  '  The  princes  of  that  country  ; '  'The 
population  of  the  same  country,'  etc.  Such 
was  the  official  title  that  Ireland  bore 
throughout  all  antiquity,  and  kept  until  the 
16th  century,  when  it  was  erected  into  a 
kingdom.* 

3. — This  same  country  (referred  to  in 
Adrian's  Letter)  possessed  a  Church  of  its 
own,  that  is,  an  Episcopal  Hierarchy  regu- 
larly constituted,  and  free  to  enter  into 
common  deliberations.  Adrian  IV.,  rec- 
ommends that  that  Church  be  consulted, 
and  its  decision  be  obtained  in  regard  to 
foreign  intervention.  This  action  of  the 
Pope  plainly  points  out  that  the  Church 
alluded  to  did  not  by  any  means  exist  under 
a  hostile  domination  which  might  or  could 
interfere  with  its  assemblies  It  is  clear, 
too,  that  the  Church  of  which  he  speaks  in 
his  Letter,  exercised  a  preponderating  influ- 
ence even  in  political  questions ;  for  the 
Pope  required  that  it  should  be  consulted 
in  regard  to  the  projected  intervention. 

3. — The  country  that  Pope  Adrian  wished 
to  preserve  from  foreign  intervention  did 
not  depend  on  only  one  chief,  or  on  only 
one  king.  His  words  designate  several 
princes  who  governed,  independently  of  one 
another,  their  respective  districts.  How 
cm  it  be  doubted  that  Ireland  is  the  coun- 
try in  question?  Adrian  IV.  recommends 
that  the  princes  be  consulted  and  their  con- 
sent be  obtained,  before  intervention  can  be 
employed  ;  but  he  does  not  name  those 
princes  neither  by  their  personal  appellation 
nor  by  the  title  of  the  districts  they  gov- 
erned. Indeed  at  that  period  the  interior 
situation  of  Ireland  was  but  little  known 
on  the  Continent.  Rome  knew  well  enough 
of  the  Episcopal  Hierarchy,  which  had  been 
re-constituted  in  Ireland  about  a  decade  of 
years  before,  but  it  had  only  imperfect  in- 
formation in  respect  to  the  political  divisions 

*  Among  the  many  proofs  that  could  be  ad- 
duced to  substantiate  this  statement,  consu't 
the  collection  <>f  the  Ftedtra  of  Rymer.  in  w  h  c\ 
on  almost  every  page,  tbe  icadt-r  will  tiiui  Ire- 
laud  allude, I  to  by  the  term  country. 


of  the  coun  ry  and  the  names  of  the  reign- 
ing chiefs  and  princes.  The  English  them- 
selves were  not  much  better  informed  on 
these  points,  although  living  in  such  close 
proximity  to  Erin. 

4. — Adrian  IV  ,  wished  thut  the  people 
should  bo  cunsu'ted,  and  that  they  should 
freely  express  their  opinion  about  interven- 
tion. The  conduct  of  the  Pope  clearly 
supposes  that  the  people  of  the  country  of 
which  he  is  speaking,  instead  of  being  op- 
pressed by  tyrants,  enjoyed  such  liberty  as 
it  was  necessary  for  tlitin  to  have,  in  order 
to  assemble  together,  deliberate  in  com- 
mon, take  part  in  general  interests,  and  alfo 
in  political  affairs.  A  Christian  people 
bowed  down  under  the  yoke  of  Infidels, 
would  not  have  the  power  to  express  their 
opinion  in  regard  to  an  expedition  projected 
for  their  deliverance  from  servitude.  It 
follows  then,  in  the  plainest  manner  pos- 
sible, from  the  Papal  Letter,  that  the  peo- 
ple of  that  country  of  which  he  is  speaking, 
instead  of  being  plunged  in  barbarism, 
possessed,  en  the  contrary,  a  certain  cul- 
ture and  civilization.  No  one  is  evtr  obliged 
to  consult  barbarians  or  brutes  ! 

5. — The  great  majority  of  the  inhabitants 
professed  Christianity  ;  if  it  were  otherwise 
the  Pope  would  not  make  use  of  the  term 
'  Church  of  the  country,'  but  by  so  doing 
he  gives  us  clearly  to  understand  that  the 
Ecclesiastical  Hierarchy  comprises  the  whole 
country.  There  were  still  some  pagans 
there  ;  but  they  were  not  in  such  force  as  to 
constitute  a  body,  society  or  government 
possessing  whole  districts.  There  were 
there  too  some  bad  Christians,  who  behaved 
as  apostates,  and  who  denied  by  their  irre- 
gularities the  faith  that  they  had  once  pro- 
fessed. This  situation  explains  and  justi- 
fies the  terms  employed  in  the  preamble  of 
the  Papal  Letter  ;  but  these  expressions  do 
not  imply  that  there  is  question  of  a  coun- 
try ruled  over  by  Infidels  against  whom  a 
crusade  should  be  preached. 

6. — No  doubt  could  be  for  a  moment  en- 
tertained about  the  necessity  of  an  expedi- 
tion to  expel  Infidels  cruelly  oppressing 
Christian  provinces  ;  all  that  was  to  be  done 
in  such  a  case  was  to  count  and  measure 
the  forces  which  the  Christians  could  em- 
ploy against  their  enemies.  But  here  Pope 
Adrian  constantly  doubts  of  the  opportune- 
ness, utility  and  necessity  of  the  undertaking, 
although  two  powerful  kings  proposed  to 
unite  all  the  forces  of  France  and  England 
for  the  undertaking.  It  is  very  clear,  there- 
fore, that  the  country  referred  to  in  the  Papal 
Letter  was  not  one  of  those  oppressed  by 
the  Moors  or  other  Infidels. 

7. — There  is  no  example  in  all  history 
where  the  Pope  refused  to  take  under  his 
protection,  and  to  defend  against  every  at- 


THE       POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


157 


tack,  the  kingdom  of  a  prince  starting  out 
on  a  Crusade  against  Infidels.  In  the  pres- 
ent case  Adrian  IV.  refnaed  the  Bull  of  pro- 
tection which  Louis  VII..  entreated  him  to 
issue,  and  he  did  not  permit  the  Crusade  to 
be  preached. 

HKSPANIA    NOT   MEANT    BY   THE  LETfER  "H.' 

We  have  designated  sewn  marks  which 
Pope  Adrian  specified  in  hi*  Letter  as  be- 
longing to  the  country  .which  was  the  ob- 
ject of  his  epistle.  But  not  one  of  these 
marks  can  be  applied  to  Spain  (Hispitiia). 
It  would  be  absurd,  therefore,  to  maintain 
that  the  Papal  Letter  concernel  an  ex- 
pedition which  Louis  VII.  and  Henry  II. 
wished  to  undertake  together  against  the 
Moors  who  oppressed  a  part  of  that  penin- 
sula. 

1. — Adrian  speaks  of  a  country.  Spain, 
on  the  contrary,  enjoyed  in  the  twelfth 
century  the  dignity  a»d  title  of  kingdom 
Indeed,  it  embraced  three  kingdoms  Cas- 
tile, Aragnii,  and  Galicia.  As  the  King  of 
Castile  was  the  most  powerful  of  the  three 
kings,  he  bore  the  title  of  Emperor.  Rob- 
ert of  Mont,  the  continuator  of  Sigebert 
relates  (1153)  that  Louis  VII.,  King  of 
France,  having  repudiated  Eleonora  of 
Guyenne,  married  Constancia,  the  daughter 
of  Alphonsus,  King  of  the  Spains.  The 
annalist  says  that  Toledo  was  the  capital 
of  the  kingdom ;  and  as  the  King  of  Castile 
was  far  above  the  petit  kings  of  Aragou  and 
Galicia,  he  was  called  the  Emperor  of  the 
Spains  L»tiis  VII.  having  made  a  pil- 
grimage in  1154  to  St.  James  of  Galicia, 
was  well  received  by  his  father  in  law,  the 
Emperor  of  the  Spains  ''+ 

In  1170  the  Emperor  of  Spain  married 
Elennora,  the  daughter  of  Henry  II.,  King 
of  England.  Ou  that  occasion  again  Rob- 
ert de  Mont  remarked  that  Toledo  was  the 
capital'  of  Castile.  As  the  Prince  was  then 
but  fifteen  years  old,  he  was  persecuted  by 
the  kings  of  Galicia  and  Navarre,  who 
were,  however,  his  near  relatives.  If  the 
expedition  proposed  to  P  pe  Adrian  IV., 
had  reference  to  Sp4n  (Hispania),  would 
Louis  VII.  have  omitred  to  speak  of  the 
Emperor  of  Castile,  his  father  in  law,  who 
demanded  his  assistance  ?  Would  not  a 

t  Robertus  rie  Monte  in  "  Patrologia  de 
Migne,"  Tom.  160,  pag.  478.  Ibid.  511. 


Castilian  ambassador  have  accompanied 
Rotrodus  to  Rome  for  the  purpose  of 
smoothing  over  matters  there  ? 

2.  —The  country   of   which  Adrian    IV. 
speaks  in  his   Letter,  had  a  Church,  and  an 
Episcopate,  and  the   Pope  demanded   that 
it  should  be  consulted  iu  reference   to  the 
projected    expedition.     But  Spain   was  at 
that  time  divided  into  two  camps.     In  the 
part    under  the   possessio'n  of  the    Moors 
there  was  no  Church  nor  Bishops ;  or,  at 
least,  it  would  have   been   passably   absurd 
to  exact  that  the  sentiment  of  these  Bishops 
should  be  taken  in  regard  to  an  expedition 
that  was  prepared  against  their  tyrants. 

3.  —If  the  Papal  Letter  concerned  Spain, 
Adrian  iV.   would   have  undoubtedly   said 
that  there  should  be  concert  of  action   with 
the  Emperor  of  Castile  and  with  the   kings 
of  Aragon,  Navarre  and  Galicia,   who  were 
each  well  known  throughout  all  Europe. 

4. — As  to  the  population;  it  is  useless 
to  speak  of  the  Moors  who  occupied  the 
country.  But  could  the  unfortunate  Chris- 
tians who  were  subject  to  their  yoke,  find 
the  ghost  of  a  chance  to  express  their  opin- 
ion in  regard  to  an  expedition  which  had 
for  its  object  their  deliverance  from  bond- 
age I  To  apply  to  Spain  the  Letter  in 
which  the  Pope  says  the  peop'e  should  be 
consulted  and  express  their  sentiments 
with  respect  to  foreisn  intervention,  is  to 
make  Pope  Adrian  IV  guilty  of  the  great- 
est folly. 

5.  — The  fifth  mark  does  not  suit  Spain 
any  better  than  do  the  first  four.  The 
Moors,  after  having  massacred  the  most  of 
the  Christians,  resided  principally  in  the 
provinces  which  they  reserved  for  them- 
selves On  the  other  hand,  not  being 
idolaters,  did  they  present  the  quality  of 
pagans  (pagani)  of  which  Pope  Adrian 
speaks  in  the  preamable  of  his  Letter. 
And  where  do  we  find  in  Spain  the  apostates, 
whom  Louis  VII.  and  Henry  II.  wished  to 
bring  under  the  Christian  yoke  ? 

6. — Adrian,  certainly,  would  not  have 
exhibited  so  much  hesitation  if  there  was 
really  a  question  of  an  expedition  against 
the  Moors  of  Spain. 

7. —Finally,  he  would  not  have  refused 
to  have  the  Crusade  preached,  and  he  would 
have  readily  received  the  kingd  m  of 
France  under  the  care  of  the  Holy  See 
during  all  the  time  the  expedition  lasted, 
if  the  expedition  was  destined  for  operations 
in  Spain. 


158 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


CHAPTER    XXX. 


Whnt  the  Topes  Have  Done  for  Ireland.— Help  Extended  to  the  Irish  People.— Im- 
portant Historical  Facts. — Correspondence  Between  Pope  Pius  IX.  and  the 
Irish  in  Borne. —  Cardinal  Manning's  Tribute. 


Having  now  completely  refuted  the  as- 
sertion that  the  Adrian  and  Alexander 
Bulls  are  genuine,  and  having  shown 
from  irrefutable  evidence  why  and  where- 
fore these  long- disputed  documents  were 
purposely  forged,  we  return  again  to  Ju^'ge 
Maguire's  malicious  book  in  order  to  com- 
plete our  task  by  exposing  and  refuting  the 
other  falsehoods  with  which  he  filled  the 
pages  of  his  publication. 

Speaking  of  the  unfriendly  attitude 
which  he  claims  the  Popes  always  mani- 
fested towards  Ireland  and  the  Irish  people 
throughout  their  numerous  struggles  for 
national  independence,  Judge  Maguire 
says : 

"  Consistency  them  art  a  jewel,"  but  surely 
Rome  cannot  be  charged  with  inconsistency  in 
dealing  with  the  Iiish.  She  has  been  consis- 
tently and  constantly  urjust  and  insultinx  to 
them.  She  has  found  them  corifi  ling  and  obe- 
dient, while  she  has  spurned  and  spat  up  >n 
them,  and  she  has  spurned  and  ppat  upon  them 
incessantly  cpparently  for  no  other  reason  than 
that  she  has  found  them  still  coifiiinpr  and 
obedient,  and  that  their  humiliation  pleased 
and  conciliated  a  more  independent  power.* 

Fortunately  for  the  cause  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  the  Popes,  and  the  people  of  Ire- 
land, History  is  an  open  book  to  every 
person  in  search  of  facts  wherewith  to  re- 
fute such  falsehoods  as  the  above  fabrica- 
tions, and  within  whose  pages  we  hope 
to  find  proofs  which  ought  to  put  to 
blush  even  apostates  who  bear  false  wit- 
ness against  the  long  line  of  Popes  who 
have  succeeded  the  much-maligned  Adrian 
IV.  and  the  equally  slandered  Alexander 
III. 

We  are  told  in  the  work  before  us  that 
the  Roman  Pontiffs  have  •'  spurned  and 
fpat  upon"  the  Irish  people  incessantly, 
and,  furthermore,  that  Rome  has  been 

•Ireland  and  the  Pope  pp.  29-30. 

t 


"consistently  and  constantly  vnjutt  and 
instil  ting  to  the  people  of  Ireland."  Can 
such  an  allegation  have  even  an  atom  of 
truth  in  its  whole  formation  ?  Let  us  turn 
to  the  records  of  the  past  and  from  the 
pages  of  history  again  convict  Judge 
Maguire  of  being  a  wanton  calumniator  of 
the  Pontiffs  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

Before  doing  so,  however,  it  may  be  well 
to  call  the  attention  of  our  readers  to  the 
fact  that  Rome  has  done  more  to  help  Ire- 
land, both  in  her  spiritual  and  temporal 
concerns,  than  she  has  done  for  any  other 
country  in  the  world. 

It  is  the  fashion  of  certain  fallen  Catholic 
Pope- haters— who  are  heretics  at  heart — 
to  harp  upon  the  assertion  that  Rome  never 
helped  Ireland  ia  her  struggles  for  consti- 
tutional liberty,  or  when  she  was  strug- 
gling in  the  throes  of  religious  persecution. 
But  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the 
Vicar  of  Christ  is  not  a  military  Major- 
General  ;  the  College  of  Cardinals  is  not 
composed  of  martial  officers  ;  St.  Peter's  is 
not  a  powder  magazine  ;  the  Vatican  is 
not  an  arsenal,  nor  are  the  Roman  Basillicas 
barracks  in  which  a  vast  army  of  soldiers 
are  housed.  The  Pope  has  neither  an 
army  nor  a  navy  to  resist  assaults  upon 
his  own  territory,  much  less  to  help  other 
nations  either  to  defend  or  to  win  their 
freedom.  There  exists  no  treasury  in  Rome 
from  •  whence  can  be  drawn  funds  where- 
with to  furnish  the  munitions  of  war  to 
foreign  nations  engaged  in  revolution,  or 
in  the  defence  of  their  lives  and  property 
against  the  assaults  of  persecuting  tyrants. 

What  folly,  then,  on  the  part  of  dema- 
gogues and  quasi- Catholics  who  are  a  dis- 
grace to  the  Church  that  made  them  Chris- 
tians, to  upbraid  the  Popes  with  having 
been  "  consistently  'and  constantly  unjust 
and  insultirg"  to  the  Irish  people,  because 


THE      POPE      AND      IKELAtfD. 


159 


Rome  did  not  furnish  firearms  which  she 
had  not,  powder  which  she  did  not  possess, 
and  soldiers  which  i-he  knew  not  of— in 
order  to  help  in  every  effort  which  Erin 
has  made  in  the  past  to  shake  off  the  Eng- 
lish yoke. 

We  have  already  declared  that  Rome  did 
more  for  Ireland  than  she  has  ever  done 
for  any  other  nation  under  the  sun,  and, 
in  order  to  illustrate  the  truth  of  this  as- 
sertion, we  will  brufly  run  over  a  few 
events  as  they  crop  out  in  Irish  history, 
showing  how  R»me  drew  the  temporal 
sword  in  Ireland's  behalf  on  many  occa- 
sions, although  Judge  Maguire  says  that 
Rome  has  "spurned  and  spat  upon  the 
Irish  people  incessat<Vy'  -  that  is  constantly 
and  without  cess  tion. 

Now  let  us  discover  what  Irish  history 
reveals  regarding  this  important  subject : 

1.  Duiing  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth, 
when  the    Plantation    of    Ulster    was   in- 
augura  ed   in   order  to  replace  the  Catholic 
Irish    with    Piotestant    English,     "letters 
were  intercepted  from  Rome,    addressed  to 
the  Irish  natives,  wherein  the  Pope  earnest- 
ly exhorted  them   to  persevere  in  their  op- 
position  to   the  Queen's  government,  with 
assurance  of  being  supplied  with  money  and 
troops,"  as   well   as    with  spiritual    favors. 
This   financial   and   martial  help   was  ten- 
dered to  Ireland  about  the  year  1574-5.  t 

2.  A   short  time    subsequently,  during 
the   reign   of  the  same  Queen,  and  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  previous  promise  of  the 
predecessor    of    Pope    Gregory     XIII.,     a 
ship  of   war   was   furnished,    six    hundred 
well-disciplined  soldiers  were  supplied,  and 
three   thousand  stand   of  arms  were  contri- 
buted by   the  Papal  influence   to   help  the 
Irish   to   defend   their  homes    against  the 
minions    of    the    English    Queen.       These 
munitions  of  war  were  furnished  by  Rome 
about  the  year  1580.  t 

3.  Speaking    of    the    Confederation    of 
Kilkenny,    which  met  on  the  10th  of  May, 
1642,  the  Nun  of  Kenmare  says  :     "  Envoys 
were    arriving    from    foreign    courts,    and 
Pope     Urban    VIII.,     had     sent    Father 


fLeland's  History  of  Ireland,  vol.  II.,  p.  311. 


tLingard's  History  of  England,  vol.  VI.,  pp. 
157-8. 


Scarampi   with  indulgences  and  a  purse  of 
$30,000  collected  by  Father  Wadding.  § 

4.  "  The  terrible  rising  of  1641,  was  the 
commencement  of  a  war  of  eleven  years, 
ending    with   the  surrender  of  Galway,  in 
1652.      Innocent   X.,  sent  the  Archbishop 
of  Fermo  (Rinuccini),  as  his  Nuncio  to  Ire- 
land, in  the  autumn  of  1645,  with  consider- 
able supplies  of  armt  and  money.     This  war 
was  for  complete  religious  freedom  and  na- 
tional independence.  "|| 

5.  About  the  year  1688,  72,000  francs 
a  year  were  supplied  by  Rome  for  the  sup- 
port  of  the   Irish  secular  clergy  and  laity. 
In  1699  the  Pope   sent  to  King  James  II., 
at  St.  Germain's  fifty-eight  thousand  francs 
for  the  Irish  Ecclesiastics  exiled  that  year. 
From  about   1750  to  1800   the  Popes  sent 
the  Irish  Bishops  a  hundred  Roman  crowns 
a  year  in  aid  of  the  Catholic  poor  schools.  IT 

6.  "The  Roman  Pontiffs,  as  Rulers  of 
the  Papal  States  ;  the  Emperors  of  Germany, 
as  heads    of    the   German     Empire ;     and 
the   Kings  of  Spain  and   France,    always 
covertly    and    sometimes    openly     received 
the     envoys    of     O'Neill,     Desmond     and 
O'Donnell,    and    openly    dispatched    troops 
and  fleets    to     assist    the    Irish    in    their 
struggle    for  their   de  facto   independence. 
All   this   was    in   perfect    accordance,    not 
merely   with  the  authority  which  Catholic 
powers   still   recognized   in    the   Sovereign 
Pontiff,   but   even    with  the  new   order  of 
things  which  Protestantism  had  introduced 
into  Western  Europe,    and  which  England, 
as  henceforth    a  leading   Protestant  power, 
had  accepted   and   eagerly  embraced.      By 
the  rejection  of  the  supreme   arbitration  of 
the  Popes  on  the  part  of   the  new  heretics, 
Europe   lost  its  unity  as  Christendom,  and 
naturally  formed   itself    into   two  leagues, 
the  Catholic  and  the  Protestant.      An   op- 
pressed  Catholic    nationality,    above  all  a 
weak  and  powerless  one,  had  therefore  the 
right  of  appeal  to  the  great  Catholic  powers 
for  help  against  oppression.      And  the  pre- 
tension  of   England   to    the   possession  of 
Ireland   was  the  very  essence  of  oppression 
and   tyranny   in   itself,    doubly  aggravated 

§aistory  of  Ireland,  p.  488. 
HUath.  Diet.  Art.  Irish  Church,  p.  461. 
ITCatholic  Dictionary,  Art.  Irish   Church,  p. 
461. 


160 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


by  the  fact  of  an  apostate  ai.d  vicious  king 
or  queen  making  it  treason  for  a  people, 
utterly  separate  and  distinct  from  theirs,  to 
hold  fast  to  its  ancient  and  revered  religion. 
Who  can  say,  then,  that  Gregory  XIII. 
was  guilty  of  injustice  and  of  abetting  re- 
bellion when,  in  1678,  he  furnished  James 
Fitymaurice,  the  great  Geraldine,  with  a 
fleet  and  army  to  fight  against  Elizabeth  ? 
The  authority  greatest  in  Catholic  eyes,  and 
most  worthy  of  respect  in  the  eyes  of  all 
impartial  men — the  Pope— thus  endorsed 
the  patent  fact-  that  Ireland  was  an  inde- 
pendent nation,  and  could  w<ige  war  against 
her  oppressors.  Here  we  have  a  stand  point 
from  which  to  argue  the  question  for  future 
times.  "= 

The  foregoing  selections,  culled  hurriedly 
from  Irish  and  English  writers,  prove  be- 
yond cavil  that  when  Judge  Maguire  as- 
serted that  Rome  had  "  constantly  and 
consistently  spurned  and  spat  upon"  the 
Irish  people,  he  was  only  carrying  out  the 
programme  of  calumny  against  the  Popes 
and  the  Catholic  Church  which  de61es  every 
p*ge  of  his  falsifying,  malicious  and  mis- 
leading publication.  Nor  was  it  for  the 
cause  of  religion  alone  that  the  Popes 
assisted  the  Irish  people,  as  uiitruthfu.ly 
asserted  in  the  work  under  review  ;  on  the 
contrary,  the  Pontiffs  who  succeeded 
Adrian  IV.,  and  Alexander  111.,  well  knew 
that  Ireland  was  an  independent  nation, 
and  was,  therefore,  perfectly  free  to  wage 
war  against  England  or  any  other  power 
which  tried  to  enslave  that  valorous  people. 
On  these  grounds,  therefore,  the  Popes 
assisted  Ireland  in  several  of  the  uprisings 
of  her  people,  sending  ships,  soldiers  and 
munitions  of  war  to  help  the  Irish  to  win 
back  their  national  independence. 

It  has  ever  been  the  aim  of  the  enemies 
of  the  Popes— both  inside  and  outside  the 
Church — to  make  capital  for  themselves  by 
calumniating  the  Sovereign  Pontiffs.  This 
fact  is  patent  to  all  readers  of  Church  His- 
tory. In  the  same  way  there  are  certain 
men  of  the  present  day,  who,  although  born 
of  Catholic  parents  and  baptized  in  the 
Catholic  Faith,  are  blatant  in  their  bold 
denunciation  of  the  Pope  because  he  re- 

=  Father  Tbtband,   The  Irish  Race,  p.  210. 


fuses  to  eudurse  every  hair  brained  attempt 
made  by  irrepressible  and  inexperienced 
mock  patriots  for  the  purpose  of  gaining 
Ireland's  freedom  through  means  that  are 
neither  pleasing  to  Almighty  God,  nor  ac- 
ceptable to  Irishmen  with  common  sense 
and  Christian  principles. 

These  men  pose  as  "patriots"  whose  ideas 
are  far  in  advance  of  those  peace  policy 
Irishmen  who  prefer  to  live  under  unjust 
laws  a  little  longer,  rather  than  to  abbre- 
viate their  time  of  enslavement  beneath  the 
iniquitous  laws  of  England  even  a  single 
minute — by  having  recourse  to  midnight 
meetings  of  sworn  associates  where  murder 
is  plotted  and  where  the  vengeance  of  God 
is  invoked  upon  the  cause  of  Ireland  by 
means  of  the  Satanic  blood  stained  bond 
which  binds  these  misguided  men  who  leave 
a  foul  stain  upon  the  fair  character  of  their 
suffering  country. 

The  Vicars  of  Christ  have  ever  been  the 
champions  of  liberty  in  every  age  and  for 
every  land.  Why,  then,  will  men  strive  to 
impress  upon  their  fellow- men  the  false  idea 
that  the  Popes,  who  have  been  the  means 
of  striking  the  shackles  from  millions  of 
slaves  and  of  emancipating  woman  from 
her  long  bondage  of  serfdom,  should  desire 
that  Ireland — of  all  countries  in  the  world 
— should  remain  a  languishing  slave 
chained  by  the  unjust  laws  of  England  and 
slowly  dying  of  destitution  and  decay? 

There  is  no  country  in  the  world  which 
the  Popes  would  sooner  see  numbered 
among  the  nations  of  the  earth  than  Ire- 
land. Any  why?  Because  she  has— as 
she  deserves  to  have —the  deep  sympathy 
of  every  reigning  Pontiff  in  consequence  of 
the  fidelity  with  which  Erin's  sons  and 
daughters  have  "  fought  the  good  fight," 
"kept  the  faith,"  and  planted  the  Cross 
upon  nearly  every  island  and  continent  of 
the  known  world ! 


Already  we  have  shown  what  some  of  the 
Popes  did  for  Ireland  in  the  earlier*  cen- 
turies, let  us  now  turn  to  our  own  times 
and  learn  from  the  lips  of  the  saintly  Pope 
Pius  IX.,  and  his  successor  now  gloriously 
reigning  what  sentiments  they  enunciated 
in  behalf  of  Ireland's  right  to  self  govern- 


THB      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


1G1 


merit  even  in  the  very  hour  when  their 
calumniators  were  crying  vengeance  against 
the  Vatican  so  as  to  make  themselves  con- 
spicuous and  thus  gain  questionable  celeb- 
rity among  the  bitterest  enemies  of  both 
the  Pope  and  the  Irish  people. 

The  sea  of  trouble  which  lashed  around  the 
Chair  of  Peter  in  the  year  1860,  drew  from 
the  Catholic  body  in  every  country  in  the 
world  expressions  of  deep  sympathy  for  the 
gad  state  in  which  the  Vicar  of  Christ  was 
placed,  surrounded  as  he  was,  by  both  for- 
eign and  domestic  enemies.  On  the  llth 
of  March  in  that  year,  the  Irish  residents  of 
Rome  met  in  conference  on  the  condition 
of  the  Holy  See,  and  determined  at  once 
to  proclaim  to  the  world  their  fealty  to  the 
Holy  Father  Pope  Pius  IX. ,  as  a  grateful 
return  for  the  love  he  ever  manifested  for 
the  Irish  people,  and  also  to  place  them- 
selves on  record  as  protesting  against  the 
diabolical  diplomacy  practiced  by  the  Italian 
Government,  by  which  the  Holy  Father 
was  despoiled  of  the  property  of  the  Church 
and  deprived  of  his  personal  .liberty. 

The  Address  presented  on  that  memor- 
able occasion  will  stand  on  record  for  all 
ages  as  a  durable  refutation  of  the  false 
ideas  promulgated  by  certain  anti  Papal 
"patriots"  who  strive  to  win  both  fame  and 
fortune  by  endeavoring  to  persuade  the 
world  that  the  love  which  the  Irish  people 
once  had  for  the  Holy  Father  has  vanished 
from  i  he  hearts  of  that  Catholic  people, 
and  that  the  Irish  have  no  grateful  mem- 
ories of  the  past  to  recur  to  in  their  con- 
nection with  Rome.  The  following  address 
is  presented  to  our  readers  in  order  that 
they  may  understand  the  grateful  feelings 
which  welled  up  in  the  hearts  of  the  Irish 
residents  in  Rome,  in  return  for  the  many 
favors  bestowed  by  the  Popes  on  Ireland 
during  by-gone  centuries. 

ADDRESS  PRESENTED  TO   POPE   Pius  IX., 

BY     THE     IRISH    RESIDENTS    OF     RoME, 

ON  SUNDAY,  MARCH  HTH,  I860. 

Mvtt  Boly  Father: — Whilst  the  Irish 
nation  t'i  om  one  extremity  to  the  other  is 
moved  at  the  sight  of  the  indignities  offered 
to  the  Vicar  of  Christ  in  the  august  person 
of  your  Holiness,  we,  your  devoted  chil- 
dren of  the  same  country,  are  gathered 
around  your  throne  to  share  in  their  sen- 


timents   of    unbounded    devotion    to    the 
Chair  of  St.  Peter,  and   to   give  expression 
to   our   most   deep  felt  sympathy  and  filial 
love   towards  your  Holiness       Most   Holy 
Father,    it  will  ever  remain  a  true  glory  to 
our  country  that  when  some  unworthy  few 
of  your    subjects,    stimulated    by    foreign 
enemies  to  your  throne,  prepared  so  severe 
an  ordeal  for  the   Vicar  of  Christ,  Ireland 
should   be   the    first    nation    whose    heart 
throbbed   with   affectionate  sympathy  and 
inaugurated  the   great  Catholic  movement, 
which,  spreading  through  the  universe,  now 
fills  with  dismay  the  enemies  of  our  holy 
religion     and    displays    the    ever  enduring 
vitality  of  the  Catholic  faith.      Most  Holy 
Father,    Ireland   has  many  special  reasons 
for  approaching  your  Holiness  in  the  hour 
of  trial.      Long  has    she   deemed    it    her 
happy   privilege   to    be    assailed   by    every 
storm   that  was  raised  against  the  Bark  of 
Peter ;  for  more  than  two  centuries  and  a 
half  her  children  gladly  suffered  confisca- 
tion of  their  property,  exile,  imprisonment 
and  the  gibbet,  rather  than  sever  the  sweet 
bonds  that   united   her   with   Rome,    and, 
even  at  the  present  day,  it  is  our  glory  to 
share  with  the  Holy  See  the  assaults  of  the 
enemies  to  all  order  and  religion.     But,  Most 
Holy  Father,  persecution  could  not  overcome 
the   fealty   of  our  hearts  for  the  Vicar  of 
Christ  ;  and  even  those   children  who  were 
torn  from  the   bosom   of  Ireland  and  com- 
pelled  to    seek    a  home    in    other    lands, 
became,  in  the  hands  of  God,  harbingers  of 
the   ylad   tidings   of  faith,  and,  true  to  the 
tradition    of   their   fathers.     The    churches 
that  they  founded  in  England,  and  Scotland, 
and   Au-tralia,   and  India,  and  the  United 
States   and  the  many  British   possessions  in 
the   Old  and   New  Worlds,  some  of  whose 
representatives  have  the  honor  of  approach- 
ing to-day  the  feet   of  your  Holiness,  re- 
echo still  the  same  sentiments  of  unalterable 
attachment  to    the    Chair    of    St.    Peter. 
Therefore,  Most  Holy  Father,  as  Irishmen, 
who   are   indebted,  after  the  grace  of  God, 
to  j  our  glorious  predecessors  for  the  bless- 
ings of  faith  which   they  now  enjoy — for  it 
was  a  Roman   Pontiff  that  sent  St.  Patrick 
to  the  shores  of  Ireland — it  was  Rome  that, 
in   the    centuries   of    her   persecution  and 
desolation,    watched   by   her   side,    sharing 
her  trials  and   her  sorrows,    pouring  into 
her   bosom  words   of  consolation  and  sweet 
hope,  and  inviting  the  nations  of  i  he  earth 
to  alleviate  her  sufferings  ;  and   it  is,  more- 
over,   to  the  constant  and  inviolate  attach- 
ment  of  the  Irish   nation   to  the  successors 
of  St.  Peter  that  she  owes,  after  Heaven, 
her  having   ever  preserved    undiminished, 
by  any  native  heresy,    or  schism,  the  most 
glorious  title   of    "Island    of    Saints"— as 
ministers  of  the  sanctuary,  who  deem  it  a 
special   privilege   to   apply  to  the  study  of 


162 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


sacred  knowledge,  under  the  shadow  of  the 
Chair  of  Peter,  in   this  city  of  holy  shrines, 
the  new  Jerusalem  of  Christ,   the  central 
See   of  the   Church   of  God— as  Catholics 
who  contemplate,  in  the  monuments  of  the 
Eternal   City,    the  triumph   of  the  Church 
over  the  powers  of  the   world,   and    who, 
moreover,   are   witnesses  (some    of   us  for 
n  any  years)  of  the  mild  and  paternal  sway 
of  your  Holiness  in  your  temporal  domin- 
ions, we  deem  it   our  duty  to  approach  the 
throne   of   our  beloved   Father,   to   tender 
the  tribute   of  our  affection  and  sympathy, 
and   to   present  to   him   the  homage  of  all 
that  we  possess,   as   well  as  of  our  devotion 
and   love.      At   the  same  time,  Most  Holy 
Father,   we    wish    to    record    our    protest 
against   every   violation   of  your  territorial 
rights,   and  to  declare,  in  unison  with  the 
whole   Catholic   world,    that   we   will    ever 
look   upon  any  usurpation  or   political  in- 
fringement on  the  temporal  sovereignly  of 
the  Holy  See  as  a   deep  wound  inflicted  on 
the   whole  Catholic  Church  of  God       Yes, 
Most  Holy  Father,    in  the  political  inde- 
pendence of  the  successors  of  St   Peter  we 
recognize  a  providential  disposition  of  that 
Divine  Spirit  which  vivifies  and  directs  the 
Catholic   Church— for  it  is  yours  to  watch 
over  the  spiritual  interests,  not  alone  of  one 
province,  or  of  one  kingdom,  but  of  all  the 
kingdoms  of  the  universe  that  are  illumined 
bv  the  rays  of  heavenly  faith.      It  is  yours 
to  uphold  the  eternal  laws  of  justice,  the 
indiasolubility   of   the   marriage   bond,    the 
discipline   of  the  Church,   and  to  vindicate 
their  infraction  by  the   proper  penalties,  no 
matter   who  may   be  the  offender,  whether 
rich   or  poor,    potentate   or    subject ;    and 
hence  it  has  been   recognized  for  centuries 
by  the  jurisprudence  of  all  nations  that  the 
common  Father  of  all  should  be  subject  to 
none.      Most  Holy  Father,  if  your  sorrows 
have  been  great,  they   have  been  only    por- 
portionate  to  the  glory  with  which  you  have 
adorned   the  Catholic  Churc-h.       Too  many 
were  the   bulwarks  raised  by   your  hands 
around   the  mystic   edifice  ot  the  House  of 
God— too  happy   were  the  efforts  of  your 
zeal   in   invigorating   sacred    discipline,    as 
well  as  in   extending   the   tents  of  Israel, 
and   gathering   new  nations   to   the  fold  of 
Christ,   not  to   provoke  the  special  rage  of 
Satan,   and  render  your  sacred  person  the 
special  object  of  his  fiercest  assaults.      But 
be   consoled,  Mo-t  Holy  Father,  for  whilst 
the  voice  of  History  attests  that  every  hand 
raised    against    the    Vicar    of    Christ    has 
withered,   each  era  of  glory  in  the  Church 
of  God  has  been  marked  by  the  fierce  storms 
which  assailed  the  Bark  of  Peter      The  Im- 
maculate Virgin,    whose    brow    you    have 
decked    with  a   peerless  crown,    shall  once 
more  crush  with  a  virginal  foot  the  infernal 
the  head  of  enemy  that  assails  you.      And 


when  it  was  asked  in  the  words  of  the 
Paalmiat :  "  Why  do  nations  rage  and  peo- 
ple devise  vain  things  ?"  the  Divine  assur- 
ance will  be  verified  in  reply,  "  He  that 
mirth  in  the  Heavens  shall  laugh  at  them, 
the  Lord  shall  deride  them."  Most  Holy 
Father,  at  your  sacred  feet  we  ask  for  our- 
selves, our  Bishops,  our  families,  and  our 
whole  nation,  your  Apostolic  Benediction. 

EEPLY    OF   POPE    PIUS    IX. 

The  reply  of  the  Holy  Father  was  to  the 
following  effect  : 

No  one  could  have  doubted  that  faithful 
and  Catholic  Ireland,  which  in  every  age 
has  given  such  signal  proofs  of  its  attach- 
ment to  the  successors  of  St  Peter,  and  so 
zealously  guarded  the  only  true  treasure  on 
earth,  the  Catholic  faith,  would  be  found 
amongst  the  first  to  manifest  its  pympathy 
in  the  present  afflicting  circimintances  and 
sufferings  of  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  of  the 
Head  of  the  Church,  or,  rather,  of  the 
Church  itself  For  it  is  certain  that  all  the 
schemes  and  plotting  of  the  revolutionists  of 
the  present  day  have  for  their  chief  object 
to  assail  our  Catholic  faith  and  destroy  ihe 
Church  of  God.  Nor  is  it  without  pleasure 
that  I  rt fleet  that  the  words  of  the  Gospel 
of  this  day  :  "  Om»e  Regnum  in  seipnum 
divisum  dfso'abitur,'  *  cannot  be  applied  to 
you.  Union  is  the  secret  of  strength,  and 
it  was  your  union  in  past  ages,  as  at  the 
present  day,  that  enabled  you  to  preserve 
the  faith  and  strike  with  terror  the  enemies 
of  God.  I  recommend  to  you  this  holy 
union  -  union  of  faith,  union  of  sentiments 
union  of  charity,  union  of  prayer  ;  for  pray- 
er is  our  support  in  every  tribulation  Let 
this  union  be  ever  inviolate,  and  you  may 
rest  assured  of  Heaven's  aid.  I  enjoin  you 
to  exhort  all  to  maintain  it,  whilat  at  the 
s> me  time  you  will  communicate  my  bless- 
ing to  the  thousands  and  millions  of  your 
countrymen  who  so  fearlessly  and  effica- 
ciously display  their  sympathy,  and  by 
words  and  deeds  sustain  the  rights  of  the 
Holy  See.  Whilst  you  are  thus  gathered 
around  the  threshold  of  the  House  of  God 
— of  that  sacred  edifice  in  which  are  divine- 
ly deposited  the  blessings  and  the  riches  of 
faith,  the  powers  of  hell  cannot  overcome 
you.  This  is  the  threshold  that  opens  on 
the  path  of  salvation,  and  ever  bear  in  mind 
that  through  it  alone  can  man  hope  to  enter 
the  fold  of  Christ.  I  exhort  you,  there- 
fore, to  cherish  this  sacred  threshold,  and 
to  be  vigilant  in  its  defence,  especially  by 
prayer.  Prayer  has  always  been  our  re- 
fuge ;  let  your  prayers  never  cease  to  be 
offered  up  to  God,  Who,  in  His  own  time, 
will  make  kn  <wn  His  power  to  the  nations 

*£very  kingdom  divided   against   itself   shall 
be  made  desolate."— ST.  MATTHEW,  xii.,  25. 


THE      POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


1G3 


that  now  "rage  against  the  Most  High," 
and  endeavor  to  destroy  the  work  of  His 
right  hand.  Powerful,  indeed,  are  the 
enemies  that  assail  us  ;  but  God's  omnipo- 
tent arm  will  crush  and  discomfit  them. 
However,  let  it  be  our  prayer  that  the 
majesty  and  power  of  God  may  be  dis- 
played, not  in  the  chastisements  which  pro- 
ceed from  His  divine  justice,  but  in  the 
fullness  and  depths  of  His  infinite  mercy. 
With  sentiments  of  the  liveliest  gratitude, 
I  leave  you  now,  imparting  to  you  my 
blessing,  and  I  pray  the  Almighty  to 
shower  down  the  plentitude  of  His  bene- 
diction upon  you,  that  it  may  accompany 
you  on  your  journey,  be  communicated  to 
your  families  and  relatives,  and  to  the 
whole  "Island  of  Saints."  In  return  pray 
to  God  for  me  ;  pray  to  Him  to  grant  me  a 
spirit  of  patience  and  resignation  to  the 
Divine  will,  as  well  as  of  courage  and  forti- 
tude amidst  the  difficulties  which  now  en- 
compass me.  Pray  to  Him  especially 
through  that  Saint,  your  glorious  Apostle, 
St.  Patrick,  whose  festival  and  memory  y  -u 
will  celebrate  in  a  few  days.  That  great 
Saint  so  deeply  rooted  the  plant  of  divine 
faith  in  Ireland,  that  the  continual  assaults 
and  persecution  to  which  your  country  was 
subjected  could  never  destroy  the  practice 
of  all  Christian  virtues  for  which  your 
island  is  renowned,  or  weaken  its  devoted- 
ness  and  reverence  to  the  Vicar  of  Christ. 
Pray  to  him  now  that  he  is  seated  near  the 
Throne  of  God,  that  he  may  obtain  for  you 
the  treatest  of  all  heavenly  blessings— which 
no  creature  can  merit — the  gift  of  final 
perseverance.  I  impart  to  you  now  my 
blessing  in  the  Name  of  Jesus  Christ,  in  the 
Name  of  the  Most  Holy  Trinity,  of  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost ;  may 
these  Names  be  ever  on  your  lips  during 
life  ;  in  the  name  of  Mary  the  Imma- 
culate Virgin,  who  is  our  hope  and  our  con- 
solation ;  and  may  you  utter  them  with  your 
dying  breath  when  about  to  be  freed  from 
all  earthly  sufferings,  and  admitted  to  the 
joys  of  the  Lord. 

In  the  foregoing  magnificent  tribute  to 
the  Irish  people,  Pope  Pius  IX.,  arises  up 
in  the  nineteenth  century  to  give  his  testi- 
mony concerning  the  fidelity  of  the  Irish 
people  to  the  Chair  of  St.  Peter,  and  there- 
by to  vindicate  that  consistent  Catholic 
» ace  from  the  aspersions  cast  upon  their 
Christian  character  by  the  forged  Bulls 
falsely  attibuted  to  his  predecessors  Adrian 
IV.,  and  Alexander  HI. 

Speaking  of  the  fidelity  of  the  Irish  peo- 
ple to  Rome  Pope  Pius  IX.,  uses  these 
words  which  welled  up  from  the  deep 
gratitude  he  felt  ia  his  heart  for  "  faithful 


and  Catholic  Ireland,  which,  in  every  age, 
has  given  such  signal  proofs  of  its  attach- 
ment to  the  successors  of  St.  Peter,  and  so 
zealously  guarded  the  only  true  treasure  on 
earth.'1  It  follows,  therefore,  that  the 
language  used  in  the  two  Bulls  under 
criticism  was  purposely  invented  by  some 
enemy  of  the  Church,  the  Irish  people,  and 
of  truth. 

In  connection  with  the  exalted  eulogy 
which  Pope  Pius  IX  ,  bestowed  upon  the 
Irish  people  for  their  fidelity  to  the  Vicar 
of  Christ — throughout  oil  ages—ii  maybe 
well  to  annex  the  following  beautiful  tri- 
bute from  Cardinal  Manning  on  the  same 
point.  The  sentiments  of  both  these 
exalted  Church  dignitaries  demonstrate 
beyond  cavil  that  they  were  fully  conscious 
that  the  calumnies  against  the  Catholic 
character,  fidelity  and  consistency  of  the 
Irish  people  injected  into  the  Adrian  and 
Alexander  Bulls,  were  founded  only  in  the 
malicious  misrepresentations  of  the  miser- 
able hireling  who  concocted  them,  and  that 
neither  of  the  Pupes  mentioned  ever  saw 
the  diabolical  documents  in  which  they  ap 
peared. 

JSwaking  of  Ireland's  fidelity  to  the  Holy 
Roman  See,  his  Eminence  Cardinal  Man- 
ning made  use  of  these  glowing  words 
of  admiration  for  the  sufferings  of  the  Irish 
people  for  the  true  Faith. 

"For  300  years  the  Catholic  Ch«-rch  in 
England  lay  desolate.  For  300  years  there 
was  no  hierarchy  uniting  it  with  the  hier- 
archy of  the  Church  throughout  the  world  ; 
for  300  years  there  were  scattered  faith- 
ful who  preserved  their  religion  at  the  peril 
of  their  Jives  ;  there  were  scattered  Priests 
who  ministered  to  them  in  secret  ;  but 
there  was  no  Catholic  Church  in  England  in 
the  lull  perfection  of  its  structure  and  au- 
thority. It  had  fallen  from  being  a  pro- 
vince in  the  Empire  of  Our  Divine  Master 
to  be  a  wilderness.  The  greater  part  of 
those  who  hear  me  are  the  children  of  a 
Church  which  was  never  wrecked,  and 
though  trodden  down  and  persecuted,  never 
lay  desolate.  It  never  lost  its  Bishops. 
They  were  martyred,  but  others  rose  in 
their  stead.  It  never  lost  its  Priesthood. 
They  were  martyred  ;  they  were  deprived  ; 
they  were  exiled  ;  they  were  dr  ven  away  ; 
but  when  one  left  his  post  vacant,  another 
took  his  place.  The  Episcopate  and  Priest- 
hood of  Ireland  have  never  failed.  Pius 


164 


THK       POPR       AND       IRELAND. 


IX.  had  no  need  to  do  in  Ireland  what  he 
had  need  to  do  in  England.  No  Pontiff  had 
been  called  to  restore  the  work  of  St.  Fat 
rick  ;  and  yet,  the  children  of  the  Church 
in  Ireland  have  gone  throughout  the  wide 
world,  and  wheresoever  you  have  been  scat- 
tered you  have  carried  with  you  the  holy 
Catholic  faith.  Not  BO  with  us.  And 


therefore  I  call  on  you  by  that  greater  bene- 
diction which  you  have  never  lost,  to  work 
together  with  us,  in  union  of  gratitude  and 
charity,  to  enable  the  Catholic  Church  in 
England  to  spread  among  r  eathen  nations 
that  faith  which  has  cost  you  so  dear  an  1 
which  you  have  loved  better  than  your  life." 


CHAPTEK    XXXI. 

The  Paternal  Love  of  Pope  Leo  XIII.  for  the  Irish  People. — How  Public  Opinion  was 
Prejudiced  against  the  Holy  Fitther. —Calumnies  cabled  around  the  World. — 
The  Pope  presented  in  his  True  Character  as  the  Consistent  Friend  of  the 
People  of  Ireland  in  their  struggle  for  National  Independence  by  rightful  means. 


Among  the  long  line  of  successors  of  St. 
Peter,  few  Popes  have  been  more  maligned 
and  misrepresented  through  the  public 
press  than  Leo  XIII. ,  at  present  gloriously 
reigning.  Since  the  very  day  of  his  elec- 
tion, eleven  years  ago,  the  enemies  of  the 
Church  in  Italy,  France  and  England, 
have  been  untiring  in  their  efforts  to 
prejudice  public  opinion  against  him  in 
every  portion  of  the  world.  A  coterie  of 
Jews  and  infidels  have  the  management  of 
the  cable  dispatches  sent  from  Rome,  and, 
in  a  hundred  instances  at  least,  some  of 
the  most  malignan'  and  baseless  misrep- 
resentations of  both  the  public  and  private 
acts  of  the  Holy  Father,  have  been  fur- 
nished to  the  reading  world  for  no  other 
purpose,  seemingly,  than  to  arouse  the 
antipathy  of  all  nations  against  the  in- 
nocent victim  of  their  diabolical  slanders. 

Realizing  the  unity  of  Faith  and  of  love 
which  exists  between  the  Vicar  of  Christ 
and  the  glorious  Catholic  race  of  Ireland, 
the  enemies  of  God's  Supreme  representa- 
tive on  earth  have  labored  with  might  and 
main  to  break  that  adamantine  chain  of 
consistent  loyalty  which  unites  the  hearts 
of  the  Irish  people  in  every  land  with  the 
Head  of  Christ's  Church.  For  this  pur- 
pose Pope  Leo  XIII.  had  to  be  accused 
of  holding  opinions  adverse  to  the  national 
aspirations  of  the  Iiish  people.  Fabulous 
charges  were  concocted  by  an  Italian 
coterie  of  conspirators  against  truth,  and 


then  circulated  by  cable  to  all  parts  of  the 
world.  The  Holy  Father  was  accused  of 
being  hostile  to  Home  Rule ;  of  being 
opposed  to  any  redress  for  Ireland's  politi 
cal  wrongs  through  public  agitation  ;  and  of 
being  in  league  with  the  English  Ministry 
to  keep  the  Irish  people  plunged  in  the 
sea  t  f  misery  which  has  marred  their  pro- 
gress ever  since  English  law  became  su- 
preme in  that  misruled  Island. 

These  calumniating  charges  were  kept 
up  so  constantly  and  repeated  so  often  that 
they  had  a  direful  effect  in  many  instances. 
Falsehood  flies  with  lightning  speed, 
whilst  the  stride  of  truth  is  slow  but 
sure.  Before,  however,  the  truth  could 
reach  the  public  ear  in  distant  lands,  even 
some  Catholics  had  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  Pope  Leo  XIII.  was  not  the  friend 
of  the  Irish  people.  How  groundless  and 
erroneous  was  that  opiuion  thus  precipi- 
tately and  passionately  formed,  is  best 
known  now  to  many  once  guilty  of  rash 
judgment  against  the  Vicar  of  Christ. 

The  best  test  by  which  to  judge  Pooe 
Leo  XI II.,  in  his  connection  with  the 
affairs  of  Ireland,  is  to  place  before  the 
reading  world  his  words  and  his  acts  con- 
cerning Irish  affairs,  and  when  these  have 
been  presented  in  the  garb  of  truth,  it 
will  be  clear  to  every  impartial  reader  that 
the  hatred  which  Pope  Leo  XIII.  is  said 
to  have  manifested  towards  the  cause  of 
national  independence  in  Ireland,  was 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


165 


merely  the  malicious  invention  of  menda- 
cious allies  of  anti-Christ,  whilst  the  love 
which  His  Holiness  manifested  in  every 
instance  toward  the  Irish  people  was  the 
love  of  a  Father  for  his  children— whose 
temporal  and  spiritual  happiness  pervaded 
every  pulsation  of  his  heart. 

Let  us,  therefore,  pass  under  review 
the  acts  and  expressions  of  Pope  Leo  XIII. 
during  the  past  eleven  years,  so  as  to  ex- 
hibit the  Holy  Father  in  th«  true  light 
in  which  he  stands  now— and  will  stand 
for  ever — in  the  estimation  of  all  just- 
minded  men.  This  is  the  more  necessary 
because  prejudice  and  passion  have  forced 
false  conclusions  upon  the  minds  of  s^me 
Catholics  who  have  seen  the  reigning 
Pontiff  only  through  the  haze  which  hatred 
has  cast  around  his  august  presence  for 
the  purpose  of  antagonizing  the  children 
of  the  Church  of  God  against  their  spiritual 
Father. 

Monsignor  O'Rielly,  in  his  "  Life  of 
Leo  XIII.,"  informs  us  that  shortly  after 
the  election  of  his  Holiness,  one  of  the  first 
missions  entrusted  by  the  Holy  Father  to 
Cardinal  Franchi,  Secretary  of  State,  was 
to  visit  Ireland  for  the  purpose  of  gaining 
personal  knowledge  of  the  true  condition 
of  that  unhappy  country. 

"Certain  it  is,"  says  the  author  in  ques- 
tion, "that  Leo  XIII.  had  a  clear  con- 
ception of  the  just  claims  of  Ireland  to  self- 
government  and  to  a  full  and  practical 
religious  liberty,  and  that  his  efforts  thence- 
forward aimed  at  keeping  the  Irish  Catho- 
lics and  the  National  party  within  the 
strict  bounds  of  constitutional  agitation, 
legal,  orderly,  and  peaceful  methods,  while 
seeking  for  the  justice  which  so  many 
Englishmen  acknowledge  to  be  due  them."* 

Thus  we  see  that  even  in  the  very  first 
years  of  his  pontificate  Pope  Leo  XIII. 
was  a  firm  believer  in  the  justice  of  Ire- 
land's claims  to  self-government,  and  as 
the  Chief  Shepherd  of  Christ's  flock,  he 
was  determined  that  as  far  aa  his  counsel 
and  influence  could  go,  the  Irish  cause 
should  never  be  crimsoned  with  crime 
against  the  supreme  laws  of  God  or  the 
Christian  ethics  of  His  Church.  No  Catho- 

*Life  of  Pope  Leo  XEIL,  p.  343. 


lie  can  gainsay  these  precautionary  metlu  ds 
of  the  Holy  Father — who  is  the  guardian 
of  God's  Faith. 

In  March,  1878,  the  Mayor  and  muni- 
cipal officers  of  the  city  of  Cork  sent  an 
address  of  congratulation  and  filial  homage 
to  the  Holy  Father  on  his  election  to  the 
pontifical  throne  In  response  thereto  Pope 
Leo  XIII.  expressed  his  deep  sense  of 
gratitude  for  their  filial  affection  and  con- 
stant love.  In  concluding,  his  Holiness 
said :  "  To  you  therefore,  beloved  sons, 
we  gladly  express  in  this  letter  our  grati- 
tude and  affection ;  and,  ready  as  we  are 
ever  to  give  you  every  proof  of  our  fatherly 
love,  we  pray  God  from  our  heart  to  be 
evermore  your  protector  and  helper,  and 
so  to  inspire  your  counsels  that  your  labors 
may  procure  His  glory  as  well  as  the  wel- 
fare and  prosperity  of  your  fMow-citizens." 

Such  language  coming  from  the  pen  of 
a  great  Pontiff,  proves  beyond  cavil  that 
every  pulse  of  his  heart  beat  in  unison  with 
the  aspirations  of  the  Irish  people  for 
Home  Rule  and  national  prosperity. 

It  is  asserted  by  designing  demagogues 
of  low  degree  and  of  little  conscience  that 
Pope  Leo  XEII.  wrote  two  Letters  to  the 
Irish  Bishops  in  the  years  1882  and  1883, 
in  which  he  unreservedly  condemned  the 
Irish  Land  League  and  the  National  League 
which  succeeded  it,  and  which  subsists  to 
this  day.  How  far  such  an  assertion  is 
from  the  truth  may  best  be  ascertained 
by  a  candid  perusal  of  the  Letters  them- 
selves, copious  extracts  from  which  we 
append  in  order  that  truth  may  triumph 
over  falsehood  in  such  an  important  his- 
torical matter. 

The  Letters  in  question  which  Pope  Leo 
XIII.  addressed  to  the  Hierarchy  of  Ire- 
land in  reply  to  several  missives  sent  by 
them  to  him,  as  well  as  to  Pastorals  issued  by 
the  Irish  Bishops  concerning  agrarian  out- 
rages then  becoming  prevalent,  were  dated 
August  1st,  1882,  and  January  1st,  1883, 
respectively,  and  the  sentiments  they  con- 
tained partook  far  more  of  Fatherly  love 
than  of  the  passionate  condemnation  so 
falsely  attributed  to  the  present  Pontiff. 

"The  kindly  affection  which  we  have 
cherished  toward  Irishmen,"  says  the  Holy 


1G6 


THE       POPE       AND       IKKLAND. 


Father  in  his  Letter  datod  August  1st, 
1882,  "and  which  seems  to  increase  with 
their  present  sufferings,  forces  us  to  follow 
the  course  of  events  in  your  island  with 
the  deep  concern  of  a  fatherly  heart.  From 
their  consideration,  however,  we  derive 
more  of  anxiety  than  of  comfort,  seeing 
that  the  condition  of  the  people  is  not 
what  we  wish  it  to  be,  one  of  peace  and 
prosperity. 

"  There  still  remain  many  sources  of 
grievance  ;  conflicting  party  passions  incite 
many  persons  to  violent  courses  ;  some  even 
have  stained  themselves  with  fearful  mur- 
ders, as  if  a  nation's  welfare  could  be  pro- 
cured by  dishonor  and  crime  ! 

"  This  state  of  things  is  to  you  as  well 
as  to  us  a  cause  of  serious  alarm,  as  we 
had  evidence  of  ere  now,  and  as  we  have 
just  noticed  by  the  resolutions  adopted  in 
your  meeting  at  Dublin.  Fearful  as  you 
were,  for  the  salvation  of  your  people,  you 
have  clearly  shown  them  what  they  have 
to  refrain  from  in  the  present  critical 
conjuncture  and  in  the  very  midst  of  the 
national  struggle. 

"In  this  you  have  discharged  the  duty 
imposed  alike  by  your  episcopal  office  and 
your  love  of  country.  At  no  time  do  a 
people  more  need  the  advice  of  their  Bish- 
ops than  when,  carried  away  by  some 
powerful  passion,  they  see  before  them 
deceptive  prospects  of  bettering  their  con- 
dition. It  is  when  impelled  to  commit 
what  is  criminal  and  disgraceful  that  the 
multitude  need  the  voice  and  the  hand 
of  the  Bishop  to  keep  them  back  from 
doing  wrong,  and  to  recall  them  by  timely 
exhortation  to  moderation  and  self-control. 
Most  timely,  therefore,  was  your  advice 
to  your  people,  reminding  them  of  the 
Saviour's  injunction,  '  Seek  ye  first  the 
kingdom  of  God  and  His  justice.'  For  all 
Christians  are  therein  commanded  to  keep 
their  thoughts  fixed,  in  their  ordinary  con- 
duct as  well  as  in  their  political  acts,  on 
the  goal  of  their  eternal  salvation,  and  to 
hold  all  things  subordinate  to  the  fulfilment 
of  their  duty  to  God. 

"If  Irishmen  will  only  keep  to  these 
rules  of  conduct  they  will  be  free  to  seek 
to  rise  from  the  state  of  misery  into  which 
they  have  fallen.  They  surely  have  a  right 


to  claim  the  lawful  redress  of  their  wrongs. 
For  no  one  can  maintain  that  Iiishmen 
cannot  do  what  is  lawful  for  all  other  peo- 
ples t<>  do. 

"  Nevertheless,  even  the  pub  ic  welfare 
must  be  regulated  by  the  principles  of  hon- 
esty and  righteousness.  It  is  a  matter  for 
serious  thought  that  the  most  righteous 
cause  is  dishonored  by  being  promoted  by 
iniquitous  means.  Justice  is  inconsistent 
not  only  with  all  violence,  but  especially  so 
with  any  participation  in  the  deeds  of  un- 
lawful societies,  which,  under  the  fair  pre- 
text of  righting  wrong,  bring  all  communi- 
ties to  the  very  verge  of  ruin.  Just  as  our 
predecessors  have  taught  that  all  right- 
minded  men  should  carefully  shun  these 
dark  associations,  even  so  you  have  added 
your  timely  admonition  to  the  same  effect. 

"As,  however,  these  same  dangers  may 
recur,  it  will  become  your  watchful  care  to 
renew  these  admonitions,  beseeching  all 
Irishmen  by  their  reverence  for  the  Catho- 
lic name,  and  by  their  very  love  for  their 
native  land,  to  have  nothing  to  do  with  these 
secrtt  societies.  These  can  in  no  way  help 
a  nation  to  obtain  redress  for  its  grievances; 
and,  all  too  frequently,  they  madly  impel 
those  whom  they  have  ensared  to  commit 
crimes. 

"•Irishmen  take  a  just  pride  in  being 
called  Catholics—  an  appellation  which,  ac- 
cording to  St.  Augustine,  means  the  guardi- 
ans of  all  honor  and  uprightness,  the  follow~ 
ers  of  all  equity  and  justice.  Let  them 
fulfill  by  their  acts  all  that  this  word  Catho- 
lic implies  ;  and  let  them,  while  vindicating 
their  own  just  rights,  endeavor  to  be  indeed 
all  that  their  name  suggests.  Let  them 
remember  that  '  the  highest  liberty  consists 
in  being  free  from  all  crime;  and  let  no  one 
among  them,  so  long  as  he  lives,  have  to 
undergo  lawful  punishment  '  as  a  murderer, 
or  a  thief,  or  a  slanderer,  or  one  who  has 
coveted  other  people's  property. '  " 

"  .  .  .  We  deem  what  you  have  de- 
creed concerning  your  young  priests  to  be 
proper  and  timely.  For  if  ever  there  were 
circumstances  when  priests  should  be  zeal- 
ous and  energetic  in  maintaining  public 
order  amid  popular  excitement,  such  are 
the  present  circumstances  with  you.  And 
j  list  as  the  estimation  in  which  one  is  held 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


167 


by  the  public  is  the  measure  of  his  influ- 
ence over  others,  even  so  should  priests 
endeavor  to  win  this  public  esteem  by  self- 
respect,  firmness,  and  temperate  word  and 
deed.  They  should  do  nothing  that  pru- 
dence could  condemn,  nothing  that  can  fan 
the  flame  of  party  strife 

"  In  this  way,  and  by  following  such 
rules  of  conduct,  we  do  believe  that  Ireland 
shall  yet  attain  to  the  prosperity  which  she 
seeks,  and  that,  too,  icithout  wronging  any 
one.  As  we  have  already  declared  to  you, 
we  trust  still  that  the  government  will 
conclude  to  grant  sa'isf action  to  the  just 
claims  of  Irishmen.  This  we  are  led  to  be- 
lieve from  their  acquaintance  with  the  true 
state  of  things  and  from  their  statesmanlike 
wisdom  ;  for  there  can  be  no  question  that 
on  the  safety  of  Ireland  depends  the  tran- 
quility  of  the  whole  empire. 

"Meanwhile,  sustained  by  this  hope,  we 
shall  lose  no  ppportunity  of  helping  the 
Irish  people  by  our  advice,  pouring  forth  to 
God  for  them  prayers  tilled  with  the  warm- 
est zeal  and  love,  beseeching  God  to  look 
down  with  kindness  on  a  nation  made  il- 
lustrious by  the  practice  of  so  many  virtues, 
to  appease  the  present  storm  of  political 
passion,  and  to  reward  them  at  length  with 
peace  and  prosperity." 


Breathes  there  a  Catholic  so  dead  to 
Divine  Faith  and  so  disloyal  to  the  justice 
of  Ireland's  holy  cause,  as  to  condemn 
Pope  Leo  XIII.  for  a  single  expression 
contained  in  the  above  love-laden  epistle 
to  the  Irish  Episcopate  ?  The  Holy  Father 
counsels  Christian  justice  and  he  condemns 
the  commission  of  crime.  What  true  Irish 
patriot  desires  to  ignore  God's  laws  in 
order  to  gain  liberty  for  his  native  land  ? 
"Let  them  remember,"  says  the  paternal 
Pontiff,  "  that  the  highest  liberty  consists 
in  being  free  from  all  crime,"  and  in  thus 
keeping  the  Irish  Land  League  free  from 
the  stain  of  crime,  the  Holy  Father  be- 
came at  once  the  most  powerful  as  well  as 
the  most  prominent  friend  of  the  Irish 
people  in  the  whole  world.  The  Popes 
never  condemned  constitutional  agitation 
as  a  political  remedy  for  political  wrongs, 
but  when  misguided  men  go  outside  God's 


law  and  the  moral  law  in  order  to  find, 
through  secret  and  illegal  sources,  remedies 
for  political  injustice— then  it  is  the  duty 
of  n  t  only  Popes,  Bishops  and  priests,  to 
condemn  their  course,  but  even  the  hum- 
blest Catholic  layman  should  raise  hia 
voice  to  warn  his  fellow-countrymen  aguust 
becoming  the  willing  victims  of  such  viciou* 
men,  who  seek  only  self-aggrandizement  by 
betraying  their  dupes,  and  earning  the  wages 
of  sin  by  turning  State's  evidence  agdiuat 
the  very  men  they  have  drawn  into  iheir 
meshes. 

The  cruel  operation  of  the  Coercion  Act 
in  Ireland,  in  the  year  1882,  was  the  cause 
of  much  turmoil,  excitement  and  crime  in 
that  sad  country  during  that  year.  Ac- 
cordingly, the  Hierarchy  appealed  to  the 
Holy  Father  for  light,  counsel  and  guid- 
ance in  the  hour  of  their  country's  trial, 
and  in  replying  to  their  appeals  Pope  Leo 
XIIL  wrote  thus : 

"  Your  letter,"  he  says  in  reply,  '  is  a 
new  proof  of  your  respect  and  affection,  as 
it  is  an  evidence  of  the  gratitude  you  and 
they  feel  toward  us  for  our  concern  in  the 
welfare  of  Ireland,  and  for  the  counsels 
given  in  our  letter  of  August  1st,  last. 

"  .  .  .  We  cannot  help  congratula- 
ting you  ...  on  the  zeal  displayed 
in  calming  the  existing  agitation.  .  .  . 
We  also  congratulate  these  children  of  the 
Church,  who  have  listened  so  obediently 
to  your  admonitions,  and  who,  enduring 
with  holy  Christian  fortitude  the  sufferings 
of  adversity,  knew  how  to  keep  their  sense 
of  wrong  within  the  bounds  imposed  by  duty 
and  religion. 

"  Still,  although  Irish  Catholics  continue 
to  give  splendid  proofs  of  their  zeal  for 
religion  and  of  obedience  to  the  Supreme 
Pastor,  the  condition  of  public  affairs  re- 
quires that  they  should  bear  in  mind  the 
rules  of  conduct  which  our  affectionate 
solicitude  for  them  induced  us  to  lay  down 
for  their  direction.  The  secret  societies,  as 
we  have  learned  with  pain  during  these 
last  months,  always  persist  in  putting  their 
hope  in  the  commission  of  crime,  in  kindling 
into  fury  popular  passions,  in  seeking  for 
the  national  grievances  remedies  worse 
than  the  grievances  themselves,  and  in 


1(58 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


pursuing  a  path  which  will  lead  to  ruin  in- 
stead of  to  prosperity. 

"It  is,  therefore,  imperative  that  you  in- 
culcate deeply  into  the  minds  of  ymir  beloved 
people,  as  we  have  already  said  that  there 
is  but  one  rule  for  what  is  right  and  for  what 
is  us-fid;  that  the  just  cause  of  their  coun- 
try must  be  kept  separate  from  the  aims, 
the  plots,  the  deeds  of  criminal  associations  ; 
that  it  is  both  right  and  lawful  for  all  who 
suffer  wroxg  to  seek  redress  by  all  lawful 
means,  but  that  it  is  neither  right  nor  lawful 
to  have  recourse  to  crime  for  redress  ;  that 
Divine  Providence  enables  the  just  to  reap 
at  last  a  joyful  harvest  from  their  patient 
waiting  and  their  virtuous  deeds,  whereas 
the  evil  doers,  having  run  their  dark  course 
to  no  purpose,  incur  the  severe  condemnation 
of  both  God  and  man. 

"  While  we  remind  you  of  all  these  truths, 
impel  ed  to  do  so  by  our  ardent  desire  to 
secure  some  solace,  quiet  and  prosperity  for 
Ireland,  we  are  also  filled  with  confidence 
that  you,  acting  in  concert  and  bound  to- 
gether by  brotherly  love,  will  continue  to 
bestow  your  best  care  in  preventing  your 
faithful  people  from  having  anything  to  do 
with  men  who,  carried  away  by  their  own 
passions,  think  they  are  doing  their  country 
service  when  thty  commit  the  worst  crir.ies, 
and  who,  by  urging  others  to  like  wicked- 
ness, bring  shame  and  dishonor  on  the  cause 
of  the  people." 

Neither  in  the  above  extracts  nor  in 
those  copied  from  the  preceding  Letter,  do 
we  find  a  single  word  of  condemnation 
against  the  Land  League,  although  this 
waa  openly  charged  against  the  Pope  in  the 
press  of  the  period.  The  Holy  Father 
commends  a  peaceful  solution  of  Ireland's 
difficulties,  and  the  only  objects  against 
which  he  hurls  the  anathemas  of  the 
Church  is  crime  and  secret  societies  -  two 
fatuitous  factors  which  have  worked  ruin 
in  Ireland  to  every  cause  with  which  they 
were  allied.  Here,  again  it  is  self-evident 
tlvit  Pope  Leo  XIII.  had  the  cause  of  Ire- 
tand  close  at  heart  when  he  sent  these 
Letters  to  the  Bishops  of  Ireland,  and 
every  friend  of  Home  Rule  will  bless  him 
fur  his  paternal  solicitude. 

Commenting  on  the  fatlvrly  counsel 
which  the  Vicar  of  Christ  imparted  to  the 


Irish  people  in  order  that  even  their  aspira- 
tions f</r  freedom  for  their  native  land 
might  be  in  full  accord  with  the  justice  of 
God,  Monsignor  O'Rielly,  from  whose  bio- 
graphy we  quote,  says  : 

''It  was  worthy  of  the  great  heart  of  the 
Pontiff,  tried  as  he  was  then  by  many  sor- 
rows, and  burdened  by  an  intolerable  load 
of  care,  to  utter  his  sentiments  regarding 
Ireland  with  such  solemn  emphasis  and 
such  fatherly  tenderness,  while  the  struggle 
in  Ireland  was  growing  in  intensity,  and 
every  effort  to  coerce  only  increased  ten- 
fold the  power  of  resistance,  and  intensified 
in  the  same  measure  the  hatred  of  laws, 
law-givers,  and  law  courts,  wh:ch  to  the 
people  meant  only  the  administration  of  in- 
justice. 

"  No  doubt  the  words  of  Leo  XIII.,  re- 
peated and  commended  from  every  pulpit 
in  Ireland,  went  far  to  assuage  the  public 
resentment  at  the  passing  and  enforcement 
of  the  'Crimes  Act,'  and  still  further  to 
prevent  many  from  joining  the  dark  so- 
cieties which  always  spring  from  national 
misery  and  thrive  on  national  discord. 

"  The  Land  League  was  suppressed  and 
its  members  imprisoned  by  the  hundred ; 
but  this  repression  only  left  the  secret  so- 
cieties a  free  field  to  work,  and  murders  and 
outrages  increased  apace.  The  prison- 
doors  were  opened  by  the  government,  and 
it  became  at  once  apparent  that  the  Land 
League,  instead  of  being  a  source  of  agita- 
tion outrage,  and  crime,  was  the  only  effec- 
tive barrier  against  them. 

"  Then  arose  the  National  League,  which 
grew  and  grew  until  it  counted  among  its 
members  or  its  fellow- workers  the  whole 
body  of  the  clergy,  nine- tenths  of  the  Cath- 
olic laity,  and  not  a  few  of  the  most  en- 
lightened and  influential  among  Protest- 
ant clergymen  and  laymen. 

"  An  incident  occurred  soon  after  this 
which  chilled  for  the  moment  the  warm  feel- 
ings of  gratituds  and  veneration  felt  in  Ire- 
land and  among  Irishmen  everywhere  for  the 
Holy  Father.  We  allude  to  the  famous 
Propaganda  circular.  But  the  See  of  Dub- 
lin becoming  vacant  in  February,  1885,  by 
the  death  of  Cardinal  McCabe,  the  Sov- 
ereign Pontiff  reserved  to  himself  to  con- 
firm the  choice  made  of  Very  Rev.  Dr. 


THE      POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


1C9 


Walsh,  President  of  St.  Patrick's  College, 
Maynooth,  to  succeed  to  the  deceased  Car- 
dinal. 

"  The  election  of  this  distinguished  man 
was  in  itself  remarkable,  as  indicating  among 
the  clergy  of  the  metropolis  an  almost 
unanimous  impulse  to  join  the  national 
movement  and  thus  reverse  the  policy  fol- 
lowed by  the  two  last  Archbishops.  The  in- 
trigues, authorized  or  unauthorized,  which 
thereafter  occurred,  to  have  the  nomination 
of  Dr.  Walsh  set  aside  by  Rome,  proved  in- 
effectual. The  Irish  Hierarchy  had  been 
summoned  to  Rome  before  the  death  of 
Cardinal  McCabe.  They  repaired  thither 
in  May.  The  Sovereign  Pontiff  had,  there- 
fore, ample  opportunity  to  ascertain  the 
wishes  of  the  Irish  Episcopate  on  the  sub- 
ject of  this  important  election,  and  to  be 
made  acquainted  with  the  true  significance 
of  the  national  movement. 

"In  June  Dr.  Walsh's  nomination  was 
confirmed.  Thenceforward  this  Prelate 
was  both  the  organ  of  his  brother- Bishops 
in  all  public  and  national  matters  and  the 
spokesman  of  his  fellow-countrymen.  From 
that  moment,  too,  there  was  a  unity  of 
thought,  purpose,  and  action  between  the 
clergy  and  the  Parliamentary  party. 

*'  The  passing  cloud  which  had  in  the  Pro 
paganda  circular  for  a  moment  darkened 
and  chilled  the  Irish  Catholic  heart  was 
now  forgotten,  and  Leo  XIII.,  became  to 
Ireland  and  her  sons  the  Lumen  in  Coslo  of 
their  own  St.  Malachy. 

"In  dealing  with  the  Br  tish  cabinet  the 
Pope,  while  considering  the  interests  of  the 
Catholic  subjects  in  Great  Britain  and  in 
Ireland,  as  well  as  throughout  the  colonies, 


had  also  to  have  a  regard  for  the  feelings  of 
the  Irish  race  both  inside  and  outside  the 
British  dominions.  As  the  settled  gloom 
on  the  material  prospects  of  the  Emerald 
Isle  deepened  with  every  decade  that  passed, 
leaving  the  Irish  agriculturist  less  of  re- 
sources and  hope,  and  Irish  labor  no  re- 
munerative field  or  market  within  the  com- 
pass of  the  Irish  seas,  the  best  and  most  re- 
ligious men  in  the  nation  found  increasing 
difficulty  in  restraining  the  outbursts  of 
mingled  despair  and  righteous  wrath  arising 
from  wrongs  easy  of  redress,  but  to  which 
the  Government  only  applied  homoeopathic 
doses  of  relief,  coupled  with  intolerable 
coercion. 

"  English  statesmanship,  Orange  fanati- 
cism, and  hatred  of  race  cried  aloud  :  Let 
them  starve  or  emigrate  !  What  could  the 
religious  guides  or  the  wise  political  leaders 
of  a  starving  and  oppressed  people  say  or  do 
to  prevent  an  armed  uprising,  which  would 
have  justified  the  accusations  and  the  de- 
mands of  the  exterminators  ?  And  what 
could  the  fatherly  heart  and  the  unpur- 
chasable  justice  of  the  Roman  Pontiff  do  to 
save  the  sufferers,  to  inspire  the  misgovern- 
ing with  a  sense  of  equity  and  humanity, 
to  refuse  to  the  oppressor  a  sanction  of  any 
of  his  schemes  for  redressing  the  wrong,  but 
what,  in  the  preceding  pages,  as  we  can 
judge  from  his  own  letter,  he  has  done  ? 

"  He  has  set  the  seal  of  his  sanction  on 
the  justice  and  righteousness  of  Irish  claims 
for  self-government ;  he  has  recommended 
to  the  nation  and  its  leaders,  churchmen 
and  laymen,  obedience  to  the  laws,  peace- 
ful and  constitutional  methods,  and  he  has 
expressed  his  hope  and  uttered  his  prayer 
that  justice  may  be  done  to  Ireland. " 


170 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


CHAPTER     XXXII. 

Farther  Manifestations  of  the  Love  of  Tope  Leo  XIII.,  for  the  Irish  People.— Address  of 
His  Holiness  to  the  Irish  Pilgrims  iu  Rome.— The  Papal  Rescript  of  1888 
Explained. — Archbishop  Walsh's  Views. — Addresses  of  his  Grace  on  the  Sympathy 
of  the  Holy  Father  for  Ireland.  Opinions  of  Cardinal  Pecci,  Cardinal  iloran, 
Bishop  Eeane  and  Mousignor  O'Rielly. 


We  now  come  down  to  the  eventful  year 
of  1888,  during  which  the  personal  charac- 
ter of  his  Holiness  Pope  Leo  XIII.  was 
made  a  prominent  target  for  traducement  at 
the  hands  of  both  the  avowed  enemies  of 
the  Church  as  well  as  by  hot-headed  poli- 
ticians who — taking  their  cue  from  anti- 
Irish  and  anti-Catholic  authority— con- 
demned the  Pontiff  at  present  gloriously 
reigning,  even  before  they  knew  the  truth 
or  the  falsehood  of  the  charges  brought 
against  him  concerning  his  sentiments  on 
the  Irish  question. 

The  first  important  event  which  took 
place  during  the  year  1888,  in  which  the 
Irish  people  were  interested,  was  the  visit 
of  the  Irish  pilgrjms  to  the  Eternal  City. 
Whilst  visiting  the  shrines  of  the  Apostles 
the  Irish  pilgrims  had  an  audience  with 
the  Sovereign  Pontiff,  during  which  an  ad- 
dress of  fealty  to  the  Holy  See  and  also  to 
the  Successor  of  St.  Peter  was  presented, 
and  in  reply  thereto  his  Holiness  —after 
alluding  to  other  matters — said  : 

"  We  accept  heartily  the  assurance  you 
give  Us  of  the  great  joy  with  which  both 
you  and  your  fellow-countrymen  commem- 
orate Our  Sacerdotal  Jubilee.  On  Our  side 
We  desire  that  you  should  have  no  doubt 
as  to  Our  reciprocating  your  affection. 

"Yes,  indeed,  Our  miud  was  turned  to 
Ireland  from  the  very  beginning  of  Our 
Pontificate  with  a  true  fatherly  solicitude. 
For  Ireland  commended  herself  to  Us  on 
many  grounds,  above  all  for  the  integrity  of 
her  faith,  upheld  by  the  triumphant  cour- 
age of  your  ancestors,  after  the  good  seed 
had  been  sown  among  them  by  the  labors 
and  virtues  of  St.  Patrick— a  faith  which 
Ireland  has  handed  down  to  you  as  a  deposit 
to  be  sacredly  guarded. 

"  Nor  is  it  without  good  reason  that  you 
firmly  rely  on  Our  affection.  We  shall 
never  ceaae  to  treat  the  Irish  people  with 


the  love  which  We  justly  owe  them;  and 
We  shall  therefore  continue  to  watch  over 
their  peace  and  prosperity  in  a  way  to  con- 
vince everybody  that  We  have  always  re- 
sponded to  the  trust  you  have  reposed  in 
Us. 

"  Of  this  kindly  disposition  towards  you, 
you  have  at  this  moment  a  striking  evidence 
in  the  fact  that  We  have,  at  the  present 
juncture  of  your  affairs,  sent  to  Ireland  on 
a  specific  Mission,  Our  Venerable  Brother, 
the  Archbishop  of  Damietta,.  in  order  to 
make  it  possible  for  Ourselves  to  gather 
from  his  report,  information  about  the  con- 
dition of  things  there,  and  what  is  best 
suited  to  you. 

"But,  inasmuch  as  your  difficulties  are 
most  urgent  you  must  in  your  conduct, 
adopt  the  rule  laid  down  in  the  Letters  ad- 
dressed by  Us  some  years  ago  to  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Dublin.  This  is  what  your  reli- 
gion requires  of  you,  that  religion  in  which 
the  Irish  nation  chiefly  glories  ;  it  is  also 
what  is  demanded  by  the  common  good  of 
the  people,  since  it  never  can  serve  the  com- 
mon good  to  violate  justice — the  foundation 
of  order  and  all  prosperity." 

The  most  hypocritical  heretic  can  find 
nothing  in  this  address  to  turn  to  the  Holy 
Father's  disadvantage,  or  in  any  way  to 
lessen  his  right  to  the  gratitude  of  all  the 
Irish  people,  as  one  of  their  best  friends 
and  their  most  reliable  counsellors 


The  feast  of  St.  Agatha,  (Feb.  5th,  1888,) 
was  celebrated  with  great  pomp,  ceremony 
and  joy  in  the  Eternal  City,  and  after  the 
religious  exercises  of  the  day  had  been 
brought  to  a  close,  a  banquet  was  given  at 
the  Irish  College,  at  which  the  toast  of  the 
Holy  Father  Pope  Leo  XIII.,  was  given 
and  responded  to  by  his  Eminence  Cardi- 
nal Schiaflino,  who  thus  portrayed  the  feel- 
ings of  love  which  welled  up  in  the  Holy 
Father's  heart  for  the  Irish  people  and 


THE      POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


171 


the  lovely  land  for  whose  liberty  they  were 
struggling.  His  Eminence  made  this  al- 
lusion to  the  Irish  question,  which  is  another 
proof  in  contradiction  to  the  angry  aspersions 
cast  upon  the  Holy  Father  by  both  open  and 
secret  enemies : 

"  Although  every  Catholic  rejoices  when 
he  hears  the  Holy  Father  named,  the 
special  ties  which  bind  the  Irish  Catholics 
to  the  Pope  are  more  holy  and  indissoluble, 
because  united  by  the  sacred  title  of  martyr- 
dom. For  three  hundred  years,  gentlemen, 
you  have  struggled  to  maintain  your  faith, 
to  uphold  the  prerogatives  of  St.  Peter  and 
the  right  of  the  Holy  Roman  See.  While 
defending  that  Frimacy  and  those  inalien- 
able rights  you  have  spared  no  sacrifice,  and 
have  freely  jjiven  up  the  dearest  things  of 
the  earth.  The  sad  history  of  your  coun- 
try has  won  for  you  the  love  of  the  Pope. 
The  green  flag  of  Ireland  has  always  been 
pure  and  stainless,  and  as  trut  flag  has 
waved  in  your  own  glorious  land,  you  need 
not  fear  to  unfurl  it  in  the  Vatican,  where 
you  have  just  offered  to  Leo  XIII.  the 
homage  of  your  love  and  faith.  You  are 
passing  through  difficult  times,  and  if  you 
only  keep  away  from  dangerous  enemies,  if 
you  will  give  no  ear  to  societies  condemned  by 
the  Pope,  your  triumph  cannot  be  long  de- 
layed." 

Here  again  we  find  in  the  words  of 
Cardinal  Schiaffino,  a  reverberation  of  the 
language  of  the  Holy  Father  addressed  to 
the  Irish  people:  "If  you  will  give  no 
ear  t  >  societies  condemned  by  the  Pope, 
your  triumph  cannot  be  long  delayed." 
The  Holy  Father  has  no  condemnation  to 
hurl  at  the  legitimate  struggles  of  the  Irish 
people  for  the  attainment  of  their  liberties, 
his  condemnation  including  only  acts  of 
violation  of  God's  law  and  the  moral  order — 
which  acts  were  caused  by  the  secret 
societies  which  were  so  justly  condemned 
by  not  only  the  Pontiff  and  the  Cardinals, 
but  also  by  every  Bishop  in  Ireland  as  well 
as  by  Charles  Stewart  Parnell  and  the 
Catholic  members  of  the  Irish  movement. 

In  April,  1888,  a  Rescript  was  issued 
in  Rome  which  caused  a  great  sensation 
throughout  the  whole  world.  The  excite- 
ment at  the  time  was  both  intense  and 
vindictive  beyond  consistency — even  among 
Catholics  themselves.  The  Holy  Father 
was  assailed  by  the  Press  of  Europe  as  the 
foe  of  freedom,  and  even  in  Ireland  he  was 
ranked  among  the  staunchest  allies  of  Eng- 


land in  her  efforts  to  keep  Ireland  under 
the  galling  yoke  of  slavery. 

But  now  that  the  clouds  which  obscured 
the  vision  of  thousands  of  well-meaning 
Irish  Catholics  have  become  dissipated,  let 
us  look  at  this  doubly-denounced  Rescript 
dispassionately,  and  we  shall  soon  learn  how 
illogical  and  indiscreet  were  those  Catholics 
who  considered  Pope  Leo  XIII.  Ireland's 
worst  enemy  because  a  Roman  Congrega- 
tion had  certain  questions  in  morals  pro- 
posed to  them  and  the  Cardinals  gave  their 
decisions  based  upon  the  questions  as  they 
were  put  before  them. 

It  is  now  nearly  a  year  since  this  docu- 
ment was  issued,  and  there  is  not  on  record 
a  single  case  where  it  has  operated  to  the 
injury  of  the  Irish  National  cause.  Why  is 
this  ?  Simply  because  the  advice  of  the 
Holy  Father  was  hearkened  to  by  the  Hier- 
archy, the  priests  and  the  people  of  Ireland, 
and  the  constitutional  agitation  of  the  Irish 
question  has  not  since  been  sullied  by  the 
commission  of  any  act  at  variance  with  the 
rules  for  its  regulation  as  laid  down  by  Pope 
Leo  XIII. 

On  May  24th,  1888,  when  the  excitement 
regarding  the  Rescript  was  yet  at  white 
heat,  Archbishop  Walsh  of  Dublin  was  on 
the  eve  of  leaving  Rome  for  Ireland,  when 
he  was  favored  with  a  long  interview  by 
the  Holy  Father,  and  he  afterwards  stated 
publicly  that— so  far  as  the  Irish  question 
was  concerned— it  was  of  a  "most  satis- 
factory character." 

The  Rome  correspondent  of  the  Boston 
Pilot,  cabled  about  the  same  time  to  the 
effect  that  "  the  Irish  cause"  had  "nothing 
to  fear  from  Leo  XIII.,"  and  also  that 
"  papal  interference  in  Irish  politics  is  im- 
possible. " 

Immediately  after  the  departure  of  Arch- 
bishop Walsh  from  Rome,  the  correspon- 
dent of  the  Liverpool  Catholic  Times  in 
that  city  wrote  an  account  of  the  interview 
between  the  Pope  and  the  Prelate,  in  which 
he  thus  described  the  nature  of  the  docu- 
ment which  was  the  innocent  cause  of  such 
excitement  for  the  time  being : 

"The  Archbishop  had  an  audience  with 
his  Holiness  a  few  days  before  he  left, 
which  lasted  more  than  an  hour,  and  the 
result  of  it  leaves  his  Grace  full  of  hope. 


172 


THE       POPE       AND      IRKI.AND. 


He  takes  with  him  to  the  Irish  people  a 
message  of  encouragement  from  the  Holy 
Father  in  reference  to  the  National  move- 
ment which  will  dispel  a  good  deal  of  mis 
understanding,  and  will  calm  the  fears  of 
many.  The  message,  I  am  sure,  will  leave 
no  doubt  on  the  minds  of  the  people  about 
the  sympathy  of  the  Holy  Father  with  both 
the  present  object  of  the  National  move- 
ment and  with  the  movement  itself.  No 
persons  are  more  dissatisfied  with  the  re- 
cent Decree  than  those  who  tried  eve'y 
means,  fair  and  foul,  to  obtain  it  — and  no 
persons  have  more  reason.  What  they 
worked  for  was  the  condemnation  of  the 
movement  itself,  or,  at  least,  of  the  Na- 
tional League.  Their  misrepresentations 
and  calumnies  have  been  nailed,  and  they 
themselves  have  been  found  out.  It  is 
hardly  possible  to  give  you  an  adequate 
idea  of  all  that  has  been  said  and  done  to 
deceive  the  authorities  in  Rome  and  that 
by  those  from  whom  cught  to  be  expected 
more  respect  for  the  Holy  See  and  more 
regard  for  the  Decalogue  which  they  so 
zealously  preach  to  others.  That  Ireland 
has  not  been  placed  under  an  interdict  as 
the  effect  of  their  falsehoods,  ought  to  be  a 
clear  indication  to  those  malicious  busy- 
bodies  that  the  authorities  here  suspected 
them  even  without  any  refutation  of  their 
tales.  Certainly,  if  all  they  said  were  be- 
lieved, nothing  less  could  be  done. 

But  the  Archbishop  of  Dublin  has  nailed 
every  calumny,  and  I  believe  that  the  very 
near  future  will  give  the  well  known  clique 
cause  to  regret  their  action  much  more  than 
their  present  disappointment  causes  them  to 
regret  it  now.  It  may  be  said  th^t  they 
believed  that  they  were  doing  a  duty.  That 
may  be.  But,  however,  a  sense  of  duty 
may  urge  them  to  carry  their  tales  to  the 
authorities,  it  is  hard  to  see  how  it  could 
make  them  go  about  the  shops  and  private 
houses  here,  trying  to  poison  the  minds  of 
every  one." 

These  facts  so  succinctly  set  forth  by  the 
correspondent  in  question  al«o  serve  to 
show  how  inconsiderate  and  uncalled-for 
was  all  the  malicious  misrepresentation 
circulated  at  that  time,  and  fanned  into 
Same  by  designing  men  for  the  sole  pur- 
pose of  making  a  breach  in  the  bond  of 
unity  which  has  always  bound  Ireland  to 
Rome,  and  which  has  been  an  eye-sore  to 
all  the  enemies  of  the  Church  throughout 
the  past  fourteen  centuries. 

When  Archbishop  Walsh  arrived  in 
Dublin  he  was  accorded  a  reception  by  the 
Dean  and  Chapter  of  his  Archdiocese,  at 
which  an  address  of  welcome  was  presented 


to  him,  and  as  the  Archbishop's  response 
thereto  will  serve  still  further  to  show 
that  the  Rescript  which  caused  so  much 
rancor  was  never  intended  to  interfere  with 
the  legitimate  actions  of  the  Irish  people 
in  their  agitation  for  Home  Rule,  we  print 
the  following  extracts  therefrom  : 

I  beg  to  thank  you,  Monsignor,  and  you, 
my  lord,  and  all  the  members  of  the  ven- 
erable Chapter  of  Dublin,  for  the  warm- 
hearted welcome  with  which  you  have 
greeted  me  on  my  return  from  Rome.  It  is, 
I  believe,  without  precedent  in  the  annals 
of  this  ancient  See — at  all  events  since  the 
close  of  the  era  of  persecution — that  its 
Archbishop  should  have  be:n  absent  from 
it  so  long  as  I  have  been.  But  I  think  lam 
safe  in  saying  that  at  no  time  in  all  those 
centuries  could  an  Archbishop  of  Dublin 
have  had  the  satisfaction  of  feeling  that  he 
was  engaged  in  a  work  more  directly  tend- 
ing to  the  advancement  of  the  best  interests 
of  the  diocese  and  of  its  people  than  that  iu 
which  it  waa  n>y  privilege  to  be  ergaged,  in 
compliance  with  the  wishes  of  the  Sovereign 
Pontiff  himself,  during  the  months  of  my  re- 
cent absence  in  Rome. 

"That  absence,  1  have  learned,  was  at 
times,  and  especially  at  one  most  critical 
moment,  a  source  of  anxiety  to  you,  and  to 
the  clergy  and  people  of  the  diocese  at  large. 
If  I  use  strong  language  in  referring  to 
those  things  that  gave  rise  to  your  anxiety, 
I  only  borrow  the  words  of  your  address. 
No  other  ground  for  it  existed  than  that 
'  unbroken  series"  of  'perversions'  and,  in- 
deed, of  'absolute  falsehoods,"  which  were 
poured  foith  from  day  to  day  by  men  whose 
Pharisaical  zeal  for  the  observance  of  one  of 
the  commandments  seems  absolutely  to  have 
blinded  them  to  the  existence  of  another 
that  stands  by  its  side. 

' '  It  was  their  policy,  it  would  seem,  to 
set  in  circulation  such  rumors  as  they 
deemed  mott  likely  to  serve  their  purpose 
in  shaking  that  firm  foundation  of  Irish 
Catholicity,  the  confidence  of  our  people  in 
the  Holy  See.  Viewing  it  merely  as  a 
policy,  we  cannot  deny  that  it  was  in  some 
sense  a  skillfully  devised  one.  But  it 
labored  under  one  serious  drawback.  The 
course  that  it  could  run  could,  at  the  best, 
be  but  a  short  one.  They  could  hardly  hope 
that  its  period  of  usefulness  to  them  could 
be  measured  by  months,  or  indeed  by  many 
weeks.  How  short-lived  it  would  be  must 
have  been  as  well  known  to  its  authors  as  it 
was  to  me,  or  to  the  great  Pontiff  whose 
venerable  name  and  whose  august  dignity 
they  treated  with  such  painful  levity  in 
presuming  day  after  day  to  make  him  fig- 
ure in  their  foolish  tales.  From  the  very 
nature  of  the  case,  the  mere  fact  of  my  re- 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


173 


turn  to  my  post  of  duty  would  manifestly 
be  sufficient  to  overturn  the  whole  fabric  of 
their  misrepresentations.  Knowing  all  this, 
they  must  have  been  sadly  astray  in  their 
estimate  of  the  firmness  and  constancy  of 
the  attachment  of  our  people  to  the  See  of 
Peter  when  they  so  foolishly  thought  that 
any  harm  could  come  to  it  from  so  frail  an 
engine  of  attack. 

*  *  *  *  * 

"To  these,  and  to  the  other  matters  of 
interest  referred  to  in  the  latter  portion  of 
your  address,  I  shall  doubtless  again  have 
occasion  to  refer.  But  I  do  not  wish  t  > 
leave  unused  the  opportunity  which  you 
have  to-day  afforded  me,  of  saying  at  all 
events  this  -  that  the  Holy  Father  was  no 
less  anxious  to  learn  the  truth  about  Ireland 
that  T  was  to  make  the  freest  use  of  the  oc- 
c  ision  which  he  so  graciously  extended  to 
me,  of  putting  before  him  in  the  fullest  de- 
tail the  true  character  of  the  claims  and  as- 
pirations of  our  people.  Whether  as  regards 
the  movement  for  national  autonomy,  or 
as  regards  the  national  struggle  for  the  re- 
dress of  all  that  cruel  injustice  which,  not- 
withstanding the  adoption  of  so  many 
measures  of  reform,  still  oppresses  the  agri- 
cultural tenants  of  Ireland;  all  those  claims 
and  aspirations  are  now  most  fully  in  his 
possession.  He  has  grasped  them  in  all  their 
bearings  and,  whilst  of  course  we  must  re- 
member that  in  matters  purely  of  politics  it 
is  not  for  him  to  interfere,  it  is  well  for  us 
to  know,  and  it  is  my  privilege  to  be  au- 
thorized to  make  it  known  to  the  people  of 
Ireland,  that  in  every  legitimate  effort  for 
the  attainment  of  that  for  which  tht-y  strive, 
our  people  may  count  upon  the  fullest  sym- 
pathy. 

"  Wherever  else  the  foolish  fiction  may 
have  had  its  way,  that  the  legislation  of  re- 
cent years  has  done  justice  to  the  people  of 
Ireland,  or  to  the  Irish  tenant,  that  fiction 
finds  no  footing  at  *ll  events  in  the  Vatican. 
Unfortunately  indeed  for  Ireland  and  her 
people,  and  unfortunately,  most  of  all,  for 
that  cruelly-oppressed  section  of  her  people 
to  which  I  have  just  now  referred,  the  rev- 
olutionary changes  of  modern  times  have 
left  but  little  of  political  influence  in  the 
hands  of  the  Sovereign  Pontiff.  That  influ- 
ence, if  it  existed,  would  to-day  be  freely 
and  unreservedly  placed  at  our  disposal. 

*•  Of  some  incidents  of  our  recent  history, 
as  they  occurred  during  my  absence  from 
Ireland,  I  do  not  wish  to  speak  in  detail. 
Some  words  of  mine  have  already  been  pub- 
lished in  which  I  spoke  of  the  pain  they 
had  brought  to  the  heart  of  the  Holy  Father. 
To  those  who  know,  as  I  have  reason  to 
know,  the  warmth  of  his  paternal  feeling  for 
his  Irish  children,  it  will  not  come  as  a 
surprise  to  hear  that  during  the  months  of 
anxiety  through  which  we  have  recently 


passed,  the  thought  which  brought  to  him 
perhaps  the  heaviest  load  of  sorrow  was  that 
of  the  injustice  which  seemed  to  be  done  to 
him  by  some,  whose  words  appeared  to  in- 
dicate a  want  of  confidence  in  the  sincerity 
and  earnestness  of  his  desire  for  the  welfare 
of  our  people.  Of  all  this  I  had,  before 
leaving  Rome,  an  assurance  from  his  own 
lips.  I  hold  in  my  hands  to-day  an  assur- 
ance of  it  in  a  more  enduring  form,  in  a 
letter  to  the  Irish  Bishops. 

"  In  this  most  important  document,  whilst 
enforcing  with  all  the  weight  of  his  supreme 
pastoral  authority  the  unlawfulness,  as  well 
as  the  short-sighted  policy  of  allowing  the 
banner  that  is  uplifted  in  so  good  a  cause  tb 
be  darkened  by  even  the  faintest  shadow  of 
moral  guilt,  his  Holiness  assures  the  Bishops 
of  Ireland,  and  through  them  the  Irish  peo- 
ple, that  there  is  not  one,  even  of  ourselves, 
who  feels  more  intensely  than  he  does  tha 
miseries  under  which  our  country  still  suf- 
fers. Not  satisfied  even  with  this,  he  as- 
sures us  in  words  of  solemn  emphasis  of  the 
earnestness  of  his  desire  that  our  distracted 
country  may  speedily  receive  the  blessing  of 
a  lasting  peace,  a  peace  based  upon  that 
which  alone  can  be  regarded  as  a  solid  or 
secure  foundation— the  attainment  of  that 
prosperity  which  Ireland,  by  the  heroic 
steadfastness  of  her  faith  through  centuries 
of  persecution,  has  so  nobly  earned." 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  point  out  to  the 
reader  the  sterling  sentiments  which  the 
Holy  Father  advances  for  Ireland's  tem- 
poral and  spiritual  prosperity  in  the  fore- 
going extracts  from  the  addresses  and  cor- 
respondence of  Pope  Leo  XIII.,  but,  as  a 
fitting  climax  to  the  triumphant  vindication 
of  this  great  Pontiff,  we  append  the  Letter 
which  the  Holy  Father  addressed  to  the 
Bishops  of  Ireland  at  the  close  of  his  Jubi- 
lee year,  and  which  entirely  exonerates 
the  Vicar  of  Christ— at  once  and  forever — 
from  the  foul  aspersions  of  antagonism  to 
Ireland's  best  interests  which  his  enemies 
have  so  unjustly  and  iniquitously  hurled 
at  the  Head  of  the  Church  of  God  on  earth. 

Following  is  the  text  of  a  document 
which  removes  every  stigma  with  which 
slander  may  have  smirched  the  saintly  char- 
acter of  Pope  Leo  XIII. 

"  Venerable  Brother  : — Health  and  Apos- 
tolic Benediction. 

"  Whilst  we  embrace  with  a  father's  love 
every  member  of  the  fold  of  Christ,  which 
He  has  entrusted  to  Our  keeping,  Our  most 
special  care,  and  the  first  place  in  Our 
thoughts,  are  reserved  for  those  whom  We 
know  to  be  sufferers  from  misfortuna  For 


174 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


We  are  moved  by  that  instinct  which  na- 
ture has  implanted  in  the  heart  of  every 
parent  to  love  and  cherish  beyond  all  the 
rest,  those  of  their  children  who  have  been 
stricken  by  any  calamity.  For  this  reason, 
We  have  always  held  in  a  special  feeling  of 
affection,  the  Catholics  of  Ireland,  long  and 
sorely  tried  by  so  many  afflictions.  And 
We  have  ever  cherished  them  with  a  love 
all  the  more  intense,  for  their  marvellous 
fortitude  under  those  sufferings  and  for 
their  hereditary  attachment  to  their  religion, 
which  no  pressure  of  misfortune  has  ever 
been  able  to  destroy  or  weaken. 

"  As  to  the  counsels  that  We  have  given 
tly/m  from  time  to  time,  and  in  Our  recent 
decree,  We  were  moved  in  these  things 
not  only  by  the  consideration  of  what  is 
conformable  to  truth  and  justice,  but  also 
by  the  desire  of  advancing  your  interests. 
For  such  is  Our  affection  for  you  that  it 
does  not  suffer  Us  to  allow  the  cause  in 
which  Ireland  is  struggling  to  be  weakened 
by  the  introduction  of  anything  that  could 
j  ustly  be  brought  in  reproach  against  it. 

"  And  that  Our  affection  towards  the 
people  of  Ireland,  may  now  be  specially 
manifested,  we  send  to  you  a  number  of 
gifts.  Among  them  there  are  vestments, 
sacred  vessels  and  ornaments  of  various 
kinds  for  the  furnishing  of  the  altar.  These, 
for  the  greater  splendor  of  the  house  of 
God  and  of  His  worship,  We  present  to  the 
Cathedral  churches  of  Ireland.  There  are 
also  other  gifts  of  less  value.  These  We 
have  specially  blessed.  They  will  serve  to 
promote  the  piety  of  the  persons  to  whom 
We  wish  them  to  be  given,  in  accordance 
with  the  directions  that  will  be  sent  to  you. 

"We  are  confident  that  even  from  this 
it  will  be  most  clearly  seen  that  Our  pater- 
nal love  for  the  ptople  of  Ireland  has  under- 
gone no  change.  And  upon  this,  Our  love 
for  them,  they  will  have  ever  stronger  and 
stronger  claims  if  they  continue  to  receive 
Our  teaching  with  docility,  trusting  in  Us, 
and  keeping  on  their  guard  against  the  de- 
ceits of  those  who  do  not  shrink  from  put- 
ting a  false  construction  upon  Our  counsels 
in  the  hope  of  uprooting,  if  it  were  possible, 
that  renowned  fidelity  to  the  Catholic 
Church,  which  holds  so  high  a  place  amongst 
the  virtues  of  the  people  of  Ireland,  and 
which  has  come  to  them  from  their  fore- 
fathers as  their  chief  and  richest  inheritance. 

"  With  a  fervent  prayer  that  Our  Apos- 
tolic Benediction  may  bring  with  it  the 
richest  gifts  and  graces  of  Heaven,  We  most 
lovingly  bestow  it  upon  you,  venerable 
brother,  upon  the  clergy  and  faithful  of 
your  charge,  and  upon  all  Ireland. 

"  Given  at  Rome,  at  St.  Peter's,  on  the 
21st  day  of  December,  in  the  year  of  Our 
Lord,  1888,  the  eleventh  year  of  Our  Ponti- 
ficate. 

"LEO  XIII.,  Pope." 


CARDINAL   PECCIS    SENTIMENTS. 

It  will  be  gratifying  to  every  Catholic 
reader  to  know  that  the  deep  interest  felt 
by  the  Holy  Father  in  the  welfare  of  Ire- 
land, both  religiously  and  politically,  is 
ardently  shared  in  by  the  brother  of  His 
Holiness,  His  Eminence  Cardinal  Joseph 
Pecci,  whose  Titular  Church  is  that  of  St. 
Agatha  in  Rome,  whose  feast  is  kept  with 
imposing  solemnity  every  ye  r  by  the 
faculty  and  students  of  the  Irish  College  in 
the  Eternal  City. 

His  Eminence  was  duly  installed  in  his 
titular  Church  on  December  27th,  1879, 
and  on  that  occasion  Mgr.  Kirby,  President 
of  the  Irish  College,  delivered  an  address, 
in  which,  after  congratulating  his  Eminence 
on  the  dignity  that  had  been  conferred  on 
him,  he  said : 

"Our  church,  Most  Rev.  Eminence, 
which  was  dedicated  to  St.  Agatha,  Virgin 
and  Martyr,  erected  in  time  of  Constan- 
tino, and  constituted  a  Cardinals  title  by 
Honorius  III.,  lays  aside  to-day  her  mourn- 
ing garb  of  widowhood  to  receive;  with  joy- 
ful exultation,  your  Eminence  as  her  new 
titular.  The  great  heart  of  Daniel  O'Con- 
nell,  which  reposes  near  your  throne,  must 
rejoice  when  it  feels  that  the  brother  of 
our  glorious  Pontiff,  Leo  XIII.,  is  titular 
of  the  National  Church  of  the  Irish  in  Rome, 
the  Church  of  that  country  for  whose  faith 
and  for  whose  emancipation  O'Connell,  for 
half  a  century,  and  armed  only  with  the 
weapons  of  reason,  truth  and  legality,  fought 
and  conquered.  Your  Eminence  is  not 
merely  a  golden  support  (sardine),  which 
will  aid  and  dignify  the  Church,  but  also  a 
model  of  Christian  and  ecclesiastical  virtues 
for  our  students  to  copy,  and  a  brilliant 
torch  of  profound  science  to  kindle  in  the 
breast  of  our  young  Levites  a  vivid  desire  to 
gain  by  prayer  and  study  the  treasures  of 
learning,  and  to  imitate,  even  at  a  long  dis- 
tance, their  sainted  ancestors  and  fellow- 
countrymen,  such  as  St.  Fregidianus,  Arch- 
bishop of  Lucca ;  St.  Cataldus,  Archbishop 
of  Tarento  ;  St.  Donatus,  Bishop  of  Fiesoli ; 
St.  Columbanus,  founder  of  Bobbio  Monas- 
tery, who  was  styled  by  Bellarmine  the 
luminary  of  his  century  ;  and  many  other 
illustrious  Irishm  n  who  left  their  native 
shores,  and  poured  themselves,  as  St.  Ber-  , 
nard  says,  like  an  inundation  over  all  the 
countries  of  Europe,  watering  them  with 
the  sweat  of  apostolic  toil,  and  adorning 
them  with  examples  of  doctrine  and  piety. 
The  crown  is  put  to  our  rejoicing  when  we 
reflect  that  in  your  Eminence  we  possess  a 
lively  image  of  Leo  XIII.,  who  was  given 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


175 


as  a  light  in  the  heaven  of  the  Church  Mili- 
tant, to  dispel  the  dark  errors  of  the  lurid 
and  lying  philosophy  which  in  those  days 
has  invaded  the  minds  of  so  many  foolish 
and  corrupt  men,  perverting  or  concealing 
the  most  essential  truths  of  natural  as  well 
as  of  revealed  religion.  In  your  Eminence 
we  recognize  a  near  resemblance  of  the  lofty 
wisdom  and  integrity  of  heart  of  this  great 
Pontiff,  whom  we  thank  for  his  exceeding 
kindness  in  giving  us  his  brother  to  be  Titu- 
lar of  this  church  and  our  own  Cardinal- 
Deacon,  entitled  to  our  love  and  veneration. 
We  invoke  the  invincible  martyr  to  whom 
this  temple  is  sacred,  and  the  Apostle  of 
Ireland,  protector  of  our  college,  to  grant 
to  you  length  of  days  and  felicity  of  every 
kind,  spiritual  and  temporal.  The  same 
blessing  we  implore  for  the  Pontiff,  your 
brother.  Tell  to  him  that  we  Irish,  de- 
voted like  our  fathers  even  to  the  shedding 
of  our  blood  for  the  cause  of  the  Holy  See, 
desire  to  behold  his  triumph,  as  once  in 
times  of  old  these  walls  witnessed  the 
triumph  of  Gregory  the  Great,  when,  after 
the  profanations  of  the  Arians,  he  conse- 
crated this  Church  of  St.  Agatha,  amid  the 
prodigies  of  heaven  and  the  applause  of  the 
Romans. " 

The  reply  made  by  Cardinal  Pecci  to  this 
speech  of  Mgr.  Kirby  was  an  elaborate  and 
magnificent  oration,  delivered  in  the  Italian 
language,  with  the  utmost  fluency  and 
grace.  The  Pope,  it  is  well  known,  was  at- 
tracted in  an  especial  manner,  when  a  young 
student  to  the  history  of  Ireland,  and  prob- 
ably owed  to  his  elder  brother,  Giuseppe, 
his  interest  in  the  trials  of  the  Irish  nation. 
For  this  reason,  the  language  used  by  Car- 
dinal Pecci  in  the  Church  of  the  Irish  Col- 
lege, may  be  taken  to  represent  the  senti- 
ments of  the  Holy  Father,  and  that  language 
was  truly  remarkable.  After  alluding  to 
the  cruel  and  excruciating  tortures  so  nobly 
and  triumpnantly  endured  by  St.  Agatha, 
in  defence  of  the  faith  of  Christ,  his  Emi- 
nence observed  that  St.  Patrick,  the  Apostle 
of  Ireland,  knew  how  to  infuse  into  the 
hearts  of  his  Irish  children  the  spirit  and 
fortitude  of  the  virgin  saint  He  traced 
with  a  master  hand  the  extraordinary  cour- 
age and  endurance  displayed  by  the  Irish  in 
defence  of  the  Catholic  Church  during  long 
centuries  of  persecution,  entering  into  ela- 
borate and  minute  details  of  confiscations, 
torments  and  deaths  under  various  shapes 
during  the  reigns  of  Henry  VII  f.,  Eliza- 
beth, James,  Anne  and  the  Georges.  To 


the  sanguinary  persecution  succeeded  an- 
other, which  the  Cardinal  styled  a  continu- 
ous and  slow  assassination,   tending  to  de- 
populate the  country  by  the  fabrication  of 
the  most    inhuman  and    unjust  laws    the 
world  had  ever  seen.     He  quoted  the  words 
of  Edmund    Burke,    characterizing  in    fit 
terms  this  singularly  subtle  code  of  legisla- 
tion, formed  for  the  purpose  of  driving  the 
Catholic  nation    into    exile  or   compelling 
them   to  deny  their  faith  and  embrace  the 
Arglican  heresy.      He  described  in  glowing 
expressions  of  commendation   the  obstinate 
and  successful  resistance  of  the  Irish  to  these 
anti-Catholic  enactments,    and  their  stead-' 
fast  attachment  to  the  creed  of  their  fathers 
and  to  the  Holy  See,  in  spite  of  all  allure- 
ments and   temptations   to  apostasy.      The 
Irish,   he  said,  knew  how  to  suffer  and  to 
die  for  their  religion  ;  but  they,    thanks  to 
the  spirit  inherited  from   St.   Patrick,  were 
incapable  of  betraying  their  conscience  or  be- 
coming  apos'ates.      The   Cardinal  did  not 
omit  the  services  of  O'Connell,  but  went 
over   every   stage   of  his    career,    alluding 
most  touchingly  to  his  final  attempt  to  lay 
in   person   before  the   Human   Pontiff  the 
trophies  of  his  exertions,  and  to  attest  with 
his  dying  breath  his  unsullied  loyalty  to  the 
Chair  of  Peter.      But,    said   his  Eminence, 
God  did  not  think  fit  to  gratify  his  last  de- 
sire.     He  died  at  Genoa,  on  his  way  to  the 
tomb  of  the  Prince  of  the  Apostles,  and  be- 
queathed his  heart  to  Home.      The  throb- 
bings  of  that  heart  vibrate  in  every  Catholic 
breast.      Finally,  Cardinal  Pecci  concluded 
an  oration,    which  was   heard  with  rapt  at- 
tention, by   a    well-deserved  compliment  to 
the  zeal   and  piety  of  the  students  of  the 
Irish  College. 

CARDINAL   MORAY'S    SENTIMENTS. 

In  the  beginning  of  the  present  year 
Cardinal  Moran  returned  to  his  affectionate 
flock  in  Sydney  from  his  visit  to  the  Holy 
Father.  His  Eminence  was  received  with 
a  most  unanimous  enthusiastic  welcome 
and  addresses  were  presented  to  him  by 
both  the  Priests  and  the  laity.  In  the 
course  of  his  reply  to  the  sterling  sentiments 
of  veneration  for  the  Vicar  of  Christ  which 
was  voiced  by  the  Catholics  of  his  See,  Car- 


176 


THE      POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


dinal  Moran  attested  to  the  love  which  he 
well  and  intimately  knew  possessed  the 
heart  of  the  Sovereign  Pontiff  for  the  Irish 
people  in  general  and  the  cause  of  Home 
Rule  in  particular  : 

"  Whilst  I  was  in  Rome,"  said  Cardinal 
Moran,  "  I  received  from  the  Pontiff's 
hands  the  "Encyclical  on  Christian 
Liberty,"  which  I  commend  to  every  one 
who  has  at  heart  that  important  subject, 
so  vital  to  society  at  the  present  day.  It 
lays  down  the  rules  and  principles  which 
alone  can  rescue  social  order  from  shipwreck, 
whilst,  at  the  same  time,  it  does  not  conceal 
the  great  truth,  so  often  ignored  by  states- 
men in  modern  times,  that  it  will  not  suffice 
to  engrave  the  sacred  name  of  Liberty  on  our 
chains,  to  give  us  the  heaven-born  blessing  of 
true  liberty.  It  is  no  breach  of  confidence  to 
say  that  the  Holy  Father  was  in  a  particular 
manner  pained  by  the  misrepresentations 
which,  for  awhile,  caused  such  anguish  to 
millions  of  Irish  hearts  at  home  and  abroad, 
as  if  his  views  were  in  opposition  to  his  Irish 
children  in  the  struggle  for  national  life  in 
which  they  are  now  engaged.  Nothing  could 
be  more  unfounded  than  such  a  supposition. 
I  do  not  know  that  in  the  long  line  of  Sov- 
ereign Pontiffs  there  has  been  even  one  to 
love  Ireland  with  greater  affection  than  does 
the  present  illustrious  Pope.  He  has  sym- 
pathized with  her  in  her  sorrows  and  re- 
joiced with  her  in  her  triumphs,  and  at  the 
present  moment  his  best  wishes  are  with 
her  devoted  son?,  who,  through  good  repute 
and  through  evil  repute,  are  endeavoring  to 
assert  her  rights  and  redress  her  wrongs. 
And  when  the  cause  of  truth  and  justice 
shall  have  triumphed,  and  the  Empire  shall 
decree  to  Ireland  the  laurel  wreath  of  na- 
tional freedom,  none  shall  more  lovingly 
rejoice  with  her  in  victory  than  Leo  XIII." 


BISHOP  JOHN  J.   KEANE  S  TESTIMONY. 

In  the  course  of  his  instructive  and  in- 
teresting lecture  on  "  The  Providential 
Mission  of  Leo  XIII.,"  Rt.  Rev.  John  J. 
Keane,  then  Bishop  of  Richmond,  but  now 
Rector  of  the  Catholic  University,  thus 
delineates  the  fidelity  with  which  the  Holy 
Father  clung  to  the  cause  of  Ireland's  na- 
tional aspirations,  even  when  every  species 
of  English  diplomacy  was  brought  into  sway 
in  order  to  induce  him  to  cast  the  weight  of 
his  powerful  and  extensive  influence  on  the 
side  of  the  English  Government : 

"  While,"  says  Bishop  Keane,  "  the  Holy 
Father  was  thus  busy  foiling  the  fierce  as- 
sault of  mail-clad  Germany,  he  had  to  with 


stand  another  attack  of  Ceesarism  from  an- 
other quarter.  This  time,  however,  it 
came  in  a  very  different  guise.  It  was  not 
Caesar  trying  to  coerce  the  Church  or  to 
crush  her  ;  it  was  Caesar  cunningly  seeking 
to  cajole  the  Church  and  to  use  her  as  a 
cat's-paw  for  his  own  selfish  ends.  This 
tells  plainly  enough  whence  the  attempt 
emanated.  With  stealthy  overtures  of 
friendliness  on  the  one  hand,  and  insinu- 
ated threats  of  hostility  upon  the  other, 
England  sought  to  win  the  Pope  to  the  un- 
worthy task  of  restraining  poor  Ireland's  as- 
pirations after  just  government  and  rightful 
freedom,  of  holding  her  submissive  to  the 
chains  of  centuries,  from  which  the  spirit  of 
our  era  is  dehvetitig  her.  But  here,  too,  Leo 
XIII.  was  found  impregnable.  Calmly  but 
firjnly,  heeding  neither  promises  nor  threats, 
he  threw  his  sympathy  and  his  influence  on 
the  side  of  justice  and  humanity.  Poor, 
down- trodden,  long-suffering  Ireland  felt 
that  she  had  indeed  in  him  a  Father  and  a 
friend,  when,  in  spite  of  the  bitterest  op- 
position and  the  most  wily  influences,  he 
appointed  to  the  See  of  Dublin  the  patriot 
Priest  who  was  the  choice  of  the  Irish  hier- 
archy and  the  darling  of  the  Irish  people. 
Few  men  have  a  more  difficult  position 
than  that  held  by  Archbishop  Walsh.  Com- 
pelled by  his  providential  situation  to  be 
not  only  the  spiritual  guide  but  also  the 
temporal  adviser  of  a  down-trodden,  gen- 
erous-hearted, and  impulsive  people,  who, 
asking  only  the  barest  justice,  are  exasper- 
ated by  taunts  and  goaded  by  coercion ; 
forced,  on  the  one  hand,  to  assert  his  peo- 
ple's right,  and,  on  the  other,  to  restrain 
their  honest  indignation  and  hold  them  in 
the  wise  and  safe  paths  of  peace  ;  constant- 
ly maligned  by  his  country's  enemies,  and 
often  misunderstood  and  misrepresented  by 
those  who  ought  to  be  her  friends  ;  he  must 
indeed  have  many  a  sad  and  weary  hour. 
But  his  chitf  comfort,  next  to  his  trust  in 
the  Qod  of  truth  and  justice,  is  the  loving 
sympathy  of  Leo  XIII." 

MONSIGNOR  O'KIELLY'S  TESTIMONY. 
The  name  of  Monsignor  O'Rielly  is  well- 
known    to    the    majority    of    our    readers 
through  the  numerous  letters  wl  ich  he  has 


THB      POPB      AND      IBBLAND. 


177 


written  for  the  American  press  upon  Irish 
affairs.  In  one  of  these  contributions  pub- 
lished in  February,  of  this  year,  this  distin- 
guished Irish  ecclesiastic  passes  this  well- 
deserved  eulogy  upon  Pope  Leo  XI IT.,  for 
the  fortitude  and  friendship  which  he  mani- 
fested in  Ireland's  favor,  even  when  every 
avenue  to  the  Vatican  was  crowded  with  the 
representatives  of  England  and  the  paid 
emiasaries  of  English  power  in  Ireland. 

Alluding  to  the  Letter  which  the  Holy 
Father  sent  to  the  Irish  Bishops  on  Decem- 
ber 28th,  1888,  Monsignor  O'Bielly  says  : 

"  It  is,  then,  with  unspeakable  satisfaction, 
after  all  the  efforts  made  and  the  intrigues 
set  on  foot  to  obtain  from  Leo  XIII.  a  con- 
demnation of  the  Irish  national  cause,  that 
we   hail  his   Letter  to  the  Irish  Bishops. 
No  more  explicit  or  formal  indorsement  of 
the  cause  pursued  by  the  immense  majority 
of  the  Irish   people,  their  clergy,  and  their 
representatives     in     Parliament    could    be 
given  by    the   supreme    authority    in    the 
Church   than  is  contained  in   this  most  op- 
portune document.     "  Venerable  brothers," 
the  letter  begins,  "  although  embra  -ing  in 
one  fatherly  love   all  individuals  composing 
the   flock   confided  to  our  care,  we  reserve 
our  most   special   solicitude    and   the   first 
place  in  our  thoughts  for  those  who  are  tried 
by  affliction.       We   are   impelled  by  an  in- 
stinct which  nature  has  given  to  the  heart  of 
every   father  to  love  and  cherish  above  all 
others  such  of  their  children  as  misfortune 
has  stricken.      For  this  reason  we  have  al- 
ways entertained   a  sentiment  of  particular 
affection  for  the  Catholics  of  Ireland,  so  long 
and  so  cruelly   tried    by   many  afflictions. 
We  have  cherished  towards  them  a  most  in- 
tense love  because  of  their  marvellous  for- 
titude in  bearing  with  their  sufferings,  and 
of  their  attachment  to  their  religion,  which 
no  ill  fortune  has  ever  been  able  to  destroy 
or  weaken."      This,  surely,  is  an  outspoken 
profession   of  generous  love  worthy  of  the 
heart   of  the   Pontiff,    and    worthy   of  the 
much-tried   nation  for  whom  he  cherishes 
such   deserved  and  honorable  predilection. 
But  in  no   manner  can  the  love  of  a  father 
for   his   dearest  ones  be  shown  more  con- 
vincingly than  by  counselling  them  in  dan- 
ger and   warding   off  from  the  cause  with 
which  their  honor  and   their  happiness  are 
identified   any   temptation,    any   peril,  any 
element   of  a  nature   to  threaten  seriously 
the  one  or  the  other       It  is  a  knowledge  of 
this   rule   of   fatherly   love  and  care  which 
will  enable  us  to  judge  aright  the  next  para- 
graph.      "  In   what   relates,"  he  says,  "  to 
the  advice  which  We  have  occasionally  given 
you,  anH  Our  recent  decree,  they  have  been 
inspired  not  alone   by  considerations  based 


on  truth  and  justice,  but  by  a  desire  to  ad- 
vance your  cause.      For  Our  affection   for 
you  is  such  that  it  will  not  permit  the  cause 
for  which  Ireland  is  struggling  to  be  weak- 
ened by  mixing  it  with  anything  that  may 
bring  on  it  just  reproach."     I  do  not  believe 
that  a  Pope  placed  in  the  delicate  and  diffi- 
cult position  in  which  Leo  XIII.  finds  him- 
self with  respect  to  the  great  powers  of  Chris- 
tendom could   express  himself  more  undis- 
guised^ in  favor  of  the  cause  of  a  nation 
heroically  struggling  for  the  attainment  of 
her  just  rights.      Even  where  the  Pontiff's 
counsel  or  decree  might  seem  at   first  sight, 
to  wound  the   national   sentiment,    or  to  be 
adverse  to  the  policy  pursued  by  the  people 
and   their  guides,  Leo.    XIII.  affirms  that 
what  he  advised  and  what  he  did  were  in- 
tended solely  to  advance   the  cause   of  Ire- 
land.     That  sacred  cause,  he  adds,  was  so 
just  in   his  eyes,    so  dear  to  his  heart,  that 
he  could  not  bear  to  see  its  success  marred, 
its  justice  or  its  honor  tainted  by  any  pro- 
ceeding that  could  deserve  condemnation  in 
the  public  opinion  of  Christendom,  which  he 
is  so  anxious  to   conciliate  in  favor  of  our 
struggling  people.      Statesmen,  public  men 
of  1  ng   experience  and  ripe  wisdom,   will 
say  that  no  proof  of  love  in  a  parent,  in  a 
ruler,  is  greater  than  when  he  has  the  courage 
to  advise  those  who  are  dear  to  him  to  pre- 
fer the  eternal  principles  of  honor  and  jus- 
tice  to   the  results  of  a   questionable  and 
short-lived  expediency.      I   have  reason  to 
know  that,    had  the  crops  failed  in  Ireland 
last  summer,  as  it   was  very  much  feared  at 
one  time   they   would,  the  affection  of  Leo 
XIII.,  for  the  suffering   people   of   Ireland 
would  have  been  further  demonstrated   by 
generous  deeds.      As  it  is  he  will  not  allow 
his  jubilee  year  to   close  without  sending  to 
every   diocese   in  the  Green  Isle,  for  distri- 
bution, gifts  which   will  remain  to  speak  of 
his  fatherly  love  during  many  a  coming  year. 
"In  order,"  he  continues,    "that  Our  affec- 
tion for  the  people  of  Ireland  should  be  es- 
pecially shown  at  the  present  time  We  send 
you  a  goodly  number  of  presents,  among 
which  you  will   find  vestments,  sacred  ves- 
sels and  ornaments  of  various   kinds  for  the 
service  of  the  altar.      We   offer  them  to  the 
cathedral   churches   of  Ireland   to  enhance 
the  splendor  of  God's  house  and  of  His  wor- 
ship.     There  are   also   gifts  of  less  value. 
These  We  have  blessed  in  a  special  manner. 
They   will   serve   to   stimulate  the  piety  of 
the  persons  We  desire  them  to  be  given  to, 
in  conformity  with  the  special  instructions 
which  shall  be  sent  to  you.       We  trust  that 
it  will  be  clearly  seen  that  Our  fatherly  love 
for  the   Irish   has    undergone  no  change. 
On   this  love  they  shall   have  still  greater 
and   greater   claims   if  they   continue  to  re- 
ceive   Our   teaching  with   docility,    to  have 
confidence   in   Us,  and  to  be  on  their  guard 


178 


THB      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


against  the  wily  dealings  of  men  who  do  not 
fear  to  give  a  false  meaning  to  Our  words  of 
advice,  in  the  hope  of  plucking  up  by  the 
roots  that  far- famed  fidelity  to  the  Church 
which  holds  a  foremost  place  among  the 
virtues  of  the  Irish  people,  a  fidelity  handed 
down  from  their  ancestors  as  their  richest 
inheritance.  Praying  fervently  that  Our 
Apostolic  Benediction  may  bring  you  the 
richest  gifts  and  graces  from  on  high,  We 
lovingly  bestow  it  on  you,  venerable 
brothers,  on  your  clergy,  on  the  faithful  of 
your  diocese,  and  on  all  Ireland.  Given  at 
Rome  from  St.  Peter's,  the  21st  day  of 
December,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord,  1888, 
the  eleventh  of  our  Pontificate.  Leo  XIII., 
Pope  "  It  is  with  feelings  of  an  indescriba- 
ble joy  that  I  write  you  this  letter.  If  re- 
ligion is  to  count  in  the  present  struggle  in 
Ireland,  as  it  has  ever  counted  in  the  past, 
as  one  of  the  mighty  forces  which  sustained 


the  nation  at  every  new  crisis  in  its  exist- 
ence, it  is  now  more  than  ever  important 
that  this  force  bu  not  weakened—  that  it  be, 
on  the  contrary,  like  the  core  in  the  Trans- 
atlantic cables,  the  life  centre  through  which 
the  Irish  people  shall  feel  every  pulsation 
of  their  undivided  and  increased  national 
energies." 

With  this  extract  we  close  this  chap- 
ter, in  the  full  belief  that  no  impartial 
man  of  any  nationality  who  has  read 
the  preceding  pages,  can  retain  for  a  mo- 
ment the  false  impression  that  Pope  Leo 
XIII.  ever  harbored  for  an  instant  a  single 
sentiment  adverse  to  the  legitimate  struggle 
of  the  Irish  people  for  their  political  eman- 
cipation from  the  slavery  which  England  has 
imposed  upon  them. 


CHAPTER    XXXIII. 


Refutation  of  Miscellaneous  Historical  Errors  which  are  the  Cause   ®f   Unjust  Censure 
upon  the  Roman  Pontiffs. 


Having  thus  traced  the  conduct  of  the 
Popes  towards  Ireland  down  through  many 
centuries,  and  proved  by  the  force  of  im- 
partial and  incontestible  evidence  that  there 
was  not  a  single  successor  in  the  See  of  St. 
Peter  who  can  be  named  as  an  enemy  of 
Ireland,  let  us  conclude  this  tabor  of  love 
by  exposing  the  remaining  fallacies  in  the 
work  before  us,  and  thus  bring  to  an  end  a 
review  and  a  refutation  of  historical  errors 
which,  it  is  earnestly  to  be  hoped,  will  not 
fail  to  convince  all  who  peruse  these  pages 
that  the  Pontilfs  of  Rome  were  by  no  means 
possessed  of  the  prejudice  against  Ireland 
which  their  enemies  assert. 

The  first  question  which  we  propose  to 
answer  is  this  : 

DID   POPE  JOHN  XXII.,    EXCOMMUNICATE   ED- 
WARD  BRUCE  AND   HIS   ADHERENTS? 

In  seeking  for  slanders  by  which  to  stain 
the  character  of  the  Popes,  so  as  to  arouse 
the  angry  passions  of  the  Irish  people  of  the 
nineteenth  century  against  the  whole  line  of 
Pontiffs,  the  author  of  the  book  under  re- 
view extracts  a  large  portion  of  his  false 


history  from  the  pages  of  a  work  which  we 
have  thoroughtly  exposed  already  under 
the  caption  of  the  O'Halloran-Dolby  Anglo- 
Irish  History.* 

From  this  source  of  English  fabricated 
falsehoods  against  both  the  Popes  and  the 
Catholic  re'igion,  any  enemy  of  the  Catholic 
Church  can  draw  comfort  and  consolation, 
as,  like  his  infamous  predecessor  and  fellow- 
countryman  Cambrensis,  Dolby  delights 
in  depicting  both  the  Popes  and  the  religion 
of  the  Irish  people  in  the  darkest  colors 
that  arose  in  his  an  ti-  Irish  imagination. 

We  are  not  much  surprised,  therefore, 
to  read  in  the  book  under  review.—  upon  the 
authority  of  the  fallacious  Dolby—  that 
Pope  John  XXII.,  pronounced  sentence  of 
excommunication  against  Edward  Bruce 
and  all  his  Irish  adherents,  and  thereby 
caused  the  national  cause  to  be  defeated  in 
consequence  of  the  Irish  people  imagining 
they  were  under  "  the  curse  of  the  Church  — 
the  blighting  breath  of  Roman  curses." 

It  i*  a  fact    well  known   to  all  readers  of 


*3ee 


79-8J. 


THE      POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


179 


history  that  since  the  fatal  day  when  the 
basilisk  eyes  of  a  British  king  were  tirst 
fixed  upon  Ireland  as  a  suitable  country  for 
invasion,  every  English  Protestant  writer 
who  wrote  on  Irish  subjects,  did  so  under 
the  inspiration  of  the  Father  of  Lies.  From 
calumniating  Cambrensis  down  to  the 
Cockney  Dolby— at  the  end  of  nearly  every 
link  in  the  chain  of  English  writers  on  Irish 
subjects  there  stand  the  names  of  English- 
men whose  minds  generated  falsehood  and 
whose  pens  diffused  poison  against  both 
the  Popes  and  the  Irish  people. 

Pope  John  XXII  ,  against  whom  this 
charge  is  brought,  was  the  Pontiff  to  whom 
Donnell  or  Donald  0  Neil  addressed  the 
letter  on  the  sufferings  of  the  natives  of 
Ireland  under  their  English  and  Norman 
invaders — to  which  we  have  already  devoted 
a  chapter,  t  and  a  perusal  of  that  Pontiff's 
Letter  in  reply  to  the  petition  of  the  Irish 
princes  will  satisfy  every  impartial  reader 
that  Pope  John  XXII.,  never  hurled  the 
anathemas  of  excommunication  against  a 
people  whom  he  styles  "  the  Rulers  and  the 
people  of  Ireland,"  thereby  acknowledging 
their  national  independence  and  theii  legiti- 
mate right  to  drive  out  of  their  territory 
the  English,  Norman  or  other  invaders. 

What  did  Pope  John  XXII.,  do  in  the 
case  of  the  Scotch,  when,  in  1318,  they  be- 
seiged  and  captured  several  English  border 
towns  belonging  of  right  to  King  Edward 
of  England  ?  Did  he  excommunicate  the 
Scotch  for  this  act  of  reprisal  1  No.  The 
Pontiff  acceded  to  the  request  of  the  Scotch 
rulers  and  people  ;  he  sent  a  letter  to  King 
Eclward  (precisely  as  he  did  in  the  case  of 
Ireland)  asking  him  to  conclude  an  honor- 
able peace.  £  Why,  therefore,  should  Pope 
John  XXII.,  excommunicate  Edward  Bruce 
and  his  Irish  followers,  for  defending  Ire- 
land against  foreign  invaders,  when  he 
merely  recommended  the  English  king  to 
make  an  honorable  peace  with  those  Scotch 
invaders  who  captured  and  burned  many 
English  towns  in  revenge  for  wrongs  which 
that  people  had  suffered  at  the  hands  of  the 
English. 

Pope  John  was  one  of  those  Pontiffs  who 
will  be  honored  by  the  Catholic  world 

fLmizard's  England,  under  date  1316-18. 
£Abbe  Darras'  Church  History. 


throughout  all  generations.  His  Pontifi- 
cate was  a  model  of  prudent,  firm,  and  we'l- 
regulated  administration  §  and  until  there  is 
more  reliable  authority  than  the  detracting 
Dolby,  Catholics  will  refuse  to  believe  that 
any  Pontiff  ever  excommunicated  any  por- 
tion of  a  people  who  were  attempting  to 
drive  out  of  their  country  foreign  invaders, 
who— as  said  by  O'Neil  in  his  letter  to  the 
Pope— "oblige  us  by  open  force  to  give  .up 
our  houses  and  our  lands,  and  to  seek 
shelter  like  the  wild  beasts  upon  the  moun- 
tains, in  woods,  marshes  and  caves."  After 
specifying  in  detail  the  proofs  of  these  and 
other  general  charges,  the  eloquent  prince 
concludes  by  uttering  this  memorable  vow 
that  the  Irish  "will  not  cease  to  fight 
against  and  among  their  invaders  unt'l  the 
day  when  they  themselves,  for  want  of 
power,  shall  have  ceased  to  do  us  harm,  and 
that  a  Supreme  Judge  shall  have  taken  just 
vengeance  on  their  crimes,  which,  we  firmly 
hope,  will  sooner  or  later  come  to  pass.  "|j 

WAS  MAYNOOTH  COLLEGE!  FOUNDED  IN  ORDER 
TO  EDUCATE  IRISH  PRIESTS  IN  THE  IN- 
TERESTS OF  ENGLAND  1 

In  the  work  under  review  we  find  the 
following  fallacious  remarks  concerning  tlie 
origin  and  objects  of  the  foundation  of 
Maynooth  College,  an  educational  institu- 
tion in  Ireland  which  has  given  to  the 
Church  many  of  her  most  learned  and 
patriotic  Priests  and  Prelates  : 

"  la  the  year  1793  a  most  extraordinary,  but 
keen,  far-dghted  and  statesmanlike  change  was 
made  by  the  English  government  in  the  matter 
of  governing  the  restless,  liberty-craving  Irish. 
*  *  *  *  Edmund  Burke,  Wm.  Pitt,  L  -rd 
Granville,  J.  Fox  and  other  English  statesmen 
resolved  upon  a  plan,  acceptable  to  the  Vati- 
can, and  also  to  the  Irish  Bishops  and  repre- 
sentatives, by  which  the  great  influence  of  the 
Irish  Priesthood  might  be  made,  at  least 
negatively,  to  serve  the  purposes  of  the  English 
Government,  This  plan  was  no  less  than  the 
establishment  of  a  royal  college  for  the  educa- 
tion of  Itish  Catholic  Priests  at  the  expense  of 
the  English  Protestant  Government." 

The  above  extract  is  false  from  beginning 
to  end,  and  as  the  history  of  the  manner 
in  which  Maynooth  College  was  founded, 
and  the  names  of  the  celebrated.  Irishmen 

§See  paees  120  to  123. 

Vol.  L  pp.  219-20. 


180 


THB      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


who  originated  the  idea,  are  but  little 
known,  the  best  way  to  refute  the  foregoing 
fallacious  assertions  is  to  give  the  details 
concerning  Maynooth  College,  which,  in 
brief,  are  as  follows  : 

In  the  year  1794  Archbishop  Troy,  of 
Dublin,  presented  a  memorial  to  the  Earl 
of  Westmoreland,  then  Lord  Lieutenant  of 
Ireland,  on  bohalf  of  himself  and  other 
Catholic  Prelates  of  that  Island.  In  this 
memorial,  after  referring  to  the  destruction 
of  the  Ecclesiastical  colleges  in  France,  and 
representing  the  absolute  necessity  for 
places  of  education  in  Ireland  for  young 
men  intending  to  reinforce  the  ranks  of 
the  Catholic  clergy,  the  memoralists  stated 
that  they  were  induced  to  undertake  the  es- 
tablishment of  proper  places  for  the  educa- 
tion of  the  clerical  youth  of  their  com- 
munion, and  prayed  a  rojal  license  for  the 
endowment  of  academies  and  seminaries 
for  educating  and  preparing  young  men  to 
discharge  the  duties  of  Priests  in  Ireland 
under  Superiors  of  their  own  communion. 

The  result  of  the  petition  of  Archbishop 
Troy  and  the  other  Irish  Prelates  was  the 
enactment  of  a  law  by  the  Irish  Parliament 
which  did  not  expressly  ordain  the  founda- 
tion of  Maynooth  College  or  any  particular 
institution  for  the  education  of  Priests  in 
Ireland,  but  which  provided  facilities  for 
the  foundation  of  a  Catholic  College  which 
the  then  existing  state  of  the  laws  affecting 
Catholic  education  did  not  allow. 

The  Act  in  question,  set  forth  the 
fact  that  by  the  laws  then  in  force  in  the 
Kingdom  of  Ireland,  it  was  not  lawful  to 
endow  any  college  or  seminary  intended 
exclusively  for  the  education  of  Catholics. 
It  required  a  special  Act  of  Parliament, 
therefore,  to  entitle  Catholics  to  educate 
their  children,  and  when  the  measure  passed 
into  a  law,  the  then  Lord  Chief  Justice  of 
the  Queen's  Bench,  the  Chief  Justice  of  the 
Common  Pleas,  the  Chief  Baron  of  the 
Exchequer,  six  Catholic  laymen,  namely, 
the  then  Earl  of  Fingal),  Viscount  Gormans- 
town,  Viscount  Kenniare,  Sir  Edward  Bel- 
lew,  Richard  Stronge,  Sir  Thomas  French, 
and  the  four  IiUh  Catholic  Archbishops, 
and  seven  other  Cathuhc  Ecclesiastics,  were 
appointed  trustees  for  the  purpose  of  es- 


tablishing, endowing  and  maintaining  one 
academy  for  the  education  solely  of  persons 
professing  the  Roman  Catholic  Religion. 

Such  was  the  origin  of  the  foundation  of 
Maynooth  College,  and  the  object  for  which 
it  was  founded.  The  idea  first  originated 
with  Dr.  Troy,  Archbishop  of  Dublin ;  it 
was  then  taken  up  by  the  Bishops  of  Ire- 
land ;  the  Act  was  passed  by  the  Irish 
Parliament,  and  by  referring  to  the  docu- 
ment itself  (36  George  III.,  C.  21,  A.  D. 
1795)  the  reader  will  find  therein  not  u 
word  authorizing  the  education  of  Roman 
Catholic  ecclesiastics. 

The  College  was  founded,  as  already  re- 
la' ed  in  1795,  and  an  annual  Parliamentary 
grant  of  about  £8,000  was  given  towards  its 
maintenance.  Rev.  Thomas  Hussey  was 
the  first  President.  The  College  contained 
about  a  hundred  students  in  1798,  when 
the  notable  rebellion  broke  out  in  Ireland, 
and  it  was  publicly  proclaimed  that  the 
Maynouth  Priests  were  at  the  bottom  of  the 
new  insurrection  against  England!  Evi.' 
dently  the  people  nearest  Maynooth  in 
those  days  did  not  consider  that  the  Irish 
Priests  could  be  turned  into  English  tools 
by  the  curriculum  of  the  College  ! 

The  number  of  students  in  Maynooth 
continued  to  increase  as  the  reputation  of 
the  College  became  known,  until  fully  four 
hundred  and  fifty  students  found  educa- 
tional facilities  within  its  hospitable  walls. 
With  the  increase  of  students  the  Govern- 
ment very  justly  increased  the  annual  pen- 
sion, thus  in  1813  Maynooth  received  a 
grant  of  £9,673  per  year,  and  again  in  1845 
the  Government  allowance  was  increased 
owing  to  the  strenuous  efforts  of  the  Irish 
Bishops,  backed  by  the  arguments  and  influ- 
ence of  such  eminent  men  as  Thomas 
Babington  Macaulay,  whose  memorable 
speech  on  the  Maynooth  Grant,  when  before 
Parliament  in  1845,  contains  this  beautiful 
passage  : 

In  the  debate  on  the  Maynooth  grant  in 
1845,  Macaulay  spoke  in  no  measured 
words  on  the  gross  injustice  done  to  Catho- 
lics by  those  who  had  appropriated  their 
property  and  granted  a  pitiful  return. 

"When  I  consider,''  said  Mr  Macaulay, 
"with  what  magnificence  religion  and  science 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


181 


are  endowed  in  our  Universities;  when  I 
call  to  mind  their  long  streets  of  palaces, 
their  venerable  cloisters,  their  trim  gardens, 
their  chapels,  with  organs,  altar-pieces,  and 
stained  windows;  when  I  remember  their 
schools,  libraries,  museums,  and  galleries  of 
art ;  when  I  remember,  too,  all  the  solid 
comforts  provided  in  those  places,  both  for 
instructors  and  pupils;  the  stately  dwellings 
of  the  principals,  the  commodious  apart- 
ments of  the  fellows  and  scholars ;  when  I 
remember  that  the  very  sizars  and  servitors 
are  lodged  far  better  than  you  propose  to 
lodge  those  priests  wh »  are  to  teach  the 
whole  people  of  Ireland  ;  when  I  think  of 
the  halls,  the  common-rooms,  the  bowling- 
greens,  even  the  stabling  of  Oxford  and 
Cambridge — the  display  of  old  plate  on  the 
tables,  the  good  cheer  of  the  kitchen,  the 
oceans  of  excellent  ale  in  the  buttery  ;  and 
when  I  remember  the  faith  of  Edward  III., 
and  Henry  VI.,  of  Mtrgaret  of  Anjou,  and 
Margaret  of  Richmond,  of  William  of 
Wycheham,  of  Archbishop  Chicheley,  and 
Cardinal  Wolsey  ;  when  I  remember  what 
we  have  taken  from  the  Roman  Catholic 
religion  — King's  College,  .New  College,  my 
own  Trinity  College,  and  Christ's  Church — 
and  when  I  look  at  the  miserable  Do-the- 
boys  Hall  we  have  given  them  in  return — I 
ask  myself  if  we,  and  if  the  Protestant 
religion,  are  not  disgraced  by  the  compari- 
son." 

To  unreflecting  Catholics,  or  to  non-Cath- 
olics with  an ti- Papal  prejudices,  it  may  ap- 
pear strange  that  the  British  Government 
should  contribute  towards  the  sustention  of 
a  College  for  the  education  of  Catholic 
Priests  in  a  country  where  the  Church  and 
the  people  had  been  persecuted  without 
restraint  by  the  very  government  that  now 
stepped  forward  to  help  Maynooth  College. 
But  this  is  easily  explained  when  it  is  re- 
membered that  the  British  Government  had 
in  its  possession  a  vast  quantity  of  valuable 
real  estate  and  buildings  in  the  shape  of 
churches,  convents,  monasteries,  abbeys  and 
religious  institutions  which  it  had  stolen 
from  the  Catholic  Church  in  past  centuries 
of  persecution  for  no  other  reason  than  be- 
cause it  was  "Popish"  property.  The  funds 
derived  from  this  sequestered  property  were 
used  to  maintain  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
church  in  Ireland,  which  at  one  time  had  a 
revenue  of  £850,000  per  annum,  and,  very 
naturally,  the  Catholics,  when  they  adopted 
the  idea  of  establishing  a  College  for  Cath- 
olic young  men,  reminded  the  British  Gov- 
ernment of  its  ill-gotten  wealth,  and  asked 


that  at  least  a  portion  of  it  should  be  ap- 
propriated for  the  use  of  the  descendants  of 
the  original  owners  of  St.  Patrick's  Cathe- 
dral and  Christ  Church  in  Dublin,  and  a 
hundred  similar  institutions  throughout  Ire- 
land, which  were  originally  Catholic  editicts 
but  which  formed  part  of  the  spoils  of  the 
extensive  robbery  perpetrated  during  the 
era  of  the  attempt  made  to  introduce  the 
Pro  estant  Reformation  into  Ireland,  which 
(thank  God  !)  never  succeeded  ! 

The  funds  appropriated  by  Pa-liament 
were  used  to  maintain  frte  scholarships 
in  Maynooth,  as  by  a  regulation  of  the 
Faculty  it  was  decided  to  admit  two  hun- 
dred students  into  the  College  as  free 
scholars,  for  whose  board  £20  each  should 
be  allowed.  These  two  hundied  free  places 
were  distributed  among  the  four  Ecclefcias- 
tical  Provinces  of  Ireland,  in  the  following 
proportions  :  To  the  Provinces  of  Armagh 
and  Cashel  were  alloted  CO  each ;  and  to 
those  of  Dublin  and  Tuam  40  each. 

Afttr  the  College  was  established,  the 
trustees  made  known  the  fact  to  the  Cardi- 
nal-Prefect of  the  Propaganda  at  Rome, 
stating  that  the  institution  was  designed  for 
the  education  of  young  men  in  Ireland  who 
had  a  vocation  for  the  Presthood,  and  on 
the  9th  of  July,  1796,  a  reply  was  receivtd 
from  the  Cardinal- Prefect  commending  the 
undertaking. 

From  the  above  brief  but  authentic  ac- 
count of  the  origin  of  JUaynooth  College, 
every  reader  may  discern  at  once  t  at 
there  was  not  a  single  iota  of  "collusion" 
between  the  Vatican  and  the  British  Gov- 
ernment at  the  inception  of  that  institution. 
The  whole  plan  originated  in  Ireland,  was 
managed  in  Ireknd,  and  the  grant  came 
from  the  Irish  Parliament.  The  Pope 
(Pius  VI.)  was  entirely  absorbed  in  en- 
deavoring to  repel  the  rising  spirit  of  Galli- 
canism  in  France,  and  in  finding  means  by 
which  to  save  Italy  from  becoming  involved 
in  the  whirlpool  of  revolution  which  was 
then  rife  in  Europe  and  which  was  subse- 
quently followed  by  the  triumphal  march  of 
Napoleon  Bonaparte  through  the  vineyards 

of  Italy. 

It  is   very  clear,    therefore,  that  what  is 

said  in  the  book  under  review  concerning 
the  Pope,  the  British  Government,  and  their 


182 


THE       POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


secret  alliance  for  the  purpose  of  educating 
Irish  Priests  so  as  to  transform  them  into 
English  subjects,  has — like  a  great  many 
other  statements  in  the  same  volume — no 
foundation  whatever  save  the  quicksands  of 
malicious  falsehood. 

WAS  THE   KEPEAL    MOVEMENT    KILLED    BY   A 
PAPAL    RESCRIPT? 

ID  the  book  under  review  it  is  stated  that 
Daniel  O'Connell  organized  the  great  Re- 
peal movement  in  the  year  1829,  and  had 
every  prospect  of  achieving  success  until,  in 
an  evil  hour,  "  Pope  Gregory  XVI.  issued 
a  Rescript  in  the  year  3843,  commanding 
the  Priests  of  Ireland  to  refrain  from  at- 
tending the  Repeal  meetings."  And  then 
the  writer  continues : 

"  O'C/onnell  saw  in  thia  Rescript  the  doom  of 
bis  race  and  country ;  the  blasting  of  all  his 
cherished  hopes.  He  rose  in  the  grandeur  of  his 
almost  superhuman  power  to  meet  and  turn  the 
power  of  the  Holy  See.  He  published  a  letter 
to  prove  that  the  Rescript  was  an  illegal  inter- 
ference with  the  civil  liberties  of  the  clergy,  la 
the  agony  of  his  soul  he  uttered  hia  famous  cry  : 
'  As  much  religion  as  you  please  from  Borne,  but 
no  politics.' " 

This  precious  piece  of  bombastic  absurdity 
is  a  regular  jumble  of  disjointed  events 
to  d  after  the  unusual  fashion  of  placing  the 
cart  before  the  horse  ! 

The  Repeal  movement  was  started  in 
April,  1840,  under  the  title  of  the  "  Loyal 
National  Repeal  Association,"*  and  as  the 
immense  organization  preserved  its  concrete 
unity  up  to  January  22nd,  1847,  when 
O'Connell  left  Ireland  as  a  political  field 
for  the  "  Young  Ireland"  party,  it  must 
have  puzzled  the  readers  of  the  book  we  are 
reviewing  to  understand  how  a  Papal  Re- 
script issued  in  1843  could  have  killed  it ! 

The  truth  is  that  what  this  erratic  and  un- 
r  jliable  adversary  of  the  Pope  calls  a  Papal 
Rescript  was  not  issued  until  1845,  and  the 
document  was  a  simple  Letter  to  the  Irish 
Bishops  asking  them  to  see  that  their  Priests 
used  less  inflammatory  language  in  their 
political  speeches,  and  cautioning  them  not 
to  permit  religion  to  suffer  through  too 
great  absorption  in  politics.  And  what  was 
the  effect  of  this  Rescript  ?  Here  is  the 

*Ihebaad'b  Irish  Race,  p.  49. 


answer  in  a  nutshell :  "  The  only  effect  pro- 
duced by  the  Papal  Rescript  was,  that  the 
tone  of  the  Catholic  clergy,  in  Iheir  political 
tpeeches  at  subsequent  meetings,  was  more 
guarded  "t 

It  is  not  true,  therefore,  that  a  Papal  Re- 
script killed  the  Repeal  movement,  any 
more  than  it  proved  to  be  "  the  doom"  of 
O'Connell 's  "  race  and  country,"  or  that  it 
"blasted  all  O'Connell 's  cherished  hopes." 
The  Repeal  movement  met  its  mortuary 
end  from  far  different  influences  than  those 
which  radiate  from  the  Vatican.  Its  death 
was  caused  by  O'Connell's  rash  promises 
never  performed,  and  by  the  organization 
of  the  more  active  members  of  the  Repeal 
association  into  what  was  aptly  called  "Tho 
Young  Ireland  Party,"  in  whose  ranks 
were  numbered  such  patriots  of  unyielding 
energy  as  Davis,  Mitchel,  Duffy,  O'Brien, 
Meagher,  and  a  phalanx  of  similar  Irish- 
men of  unblemished  character  and  undying 
enthusiasm  in  the  cause  of  their  native 
land. 

The  causes  which  led  to  the  downfall  of 
the  Repeal  movement,  were  the  natural  out- 
come of  the  changes  in  the  political  senti- 
ments of  the  Irish  people  who  had  grown 
up  in  the  country  during  the  decade  of 
years  in  which  O'Connell  had  preached  his 
peace  policy  from  the  hill  tops  of  Ireland. 
But  when  the  Irish  people  found  that  the 
Lord  Lieutenant  Lad  issued  a  proclamation 
suppressing  the  meeting  O'Connell  proposed 
holding  on  the  plains  of  Clontarf,  then  they 
saw  that  the  cry  of  "  peace"  towards  the 
English  Government  could  no  longer  rally 
the  people  under  O'Connell's  standard,  and 
they  were  ready  to  adopt  any  system  of 
physical  force  agitation  which  presented  it- 
self for  their  relief  from  the  thraldom  of 
England. 

The  Clontarf  meeting  was  announced  to 
take  place  on  Sunday,  October  8th,  1843, 
but  bad  to  be  abandoned  in  order  to  save 
from  general  massacre  the  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  Irish  men  and  women  who 
would  have  gathered  there.  One  year  later, 
(October  14th,  1844,)  O'Connell,  his  son 
John,  Thomas  Steele,  T.  M.  Ray,  Charles 

fO'Keefe'8  Life  and  Tim:s  of  O'Connell,  Vol. 
IL  page  724. 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


183 


Gavan  Duffy,  John  Gray,  Richard  Barrett, 
and  Rev.  Thomas  Tyrell  were  arrested  and 
subsequently  tried,  convicted  of  course,  and 
imprisoned  in  Richmond  prison.  This 
event  was  the  first  nail  in  the  coffin  of  the 
Repeal  movement. 

When  O'Connell  and  the  other  traversers 
of  English  la»v  in  Ireland  were  released 
from  prison  on  September  7th,  1845,  the 
Liberator  was  accorded  what  proved  to  be 
the  final  ovation  of  the  Irish  people  to  the 
idol  of  their  hearts.  Half  a  million  people 
joined  in  or  witnessed  with  willing  sym- 
pathy the  procession  which  escorted  the 
Irish  Tribune  and  his  compatriots  along  the 
streets  and  quays  of  the  city  of  Dublin,  and 
all  Ireland  was  ablaze  with  joy  at  the  libera- 
tion of  the  Catholic  champion  of  down- 
trodden Erin. 

This  day  proved  to  be  the  full  meredian 
of  O'Connell  s  glory.  It  was  the  closing 
tableau  in  the  Irish  political  drama  wherein 
he  had  represented  the  hero  of  the  hour, 
and  his  place  on  the  public  stage  of  Irish 
politics  was  replaced  by  such  revolution- 
ary associations  as  the  "  '82  Club,"  the 
"  Phoanix  Clubs,"  the  "  Young  Ireland 
Party,"  and  instead  of  preaching  the  peace 
policy  which  Richard  Barret  of  the  Dublin 
Pilot  and  John  Gray  of  the  Dublin  Fi  ee- 
man's  Jownal  had  advocated  during  the 
time  of  O'Connell's  agitation  for  Repeal  by 
constitutional  means,  the  Nation  under 
Duffy,  and  the  Felon  under  Mitchell,  vied 
with  each  other  in  their  earnestness  to  erect 
barricades  in  the  streets  of  the  Metropolis, 
to  invoke  the  strong  arm  of  the  Irish  peas- 
antry, and  to  wage  war  to  the  hilt  against 
the  English  oppressors  of  the  Irish  people. 
This  was  the  second  nail  in  the  coffin  of  the 
constitutional  movement  for  Repeal  of  the 
Union  between  Great  Britian  and  Ireland. 
Let  us  now  turn  to  a  reliable  source*  and 
learn  therefrom  the  causes  which  led  to  the 
final  collapse  of  the  Repeal  agitation  : 

The  British  aristocracy  made  O'Connell  a 
prisoner  in  a  jail,  but  the  Irish  democracy 
enthroned  him  as  a  king  in  the  Rotundo. 
The  ignominy  which  the  government  sought 
to  attach  to  him  was  removed  and  melted 
away  in  the  brilliant  splendors  of  the 
"levee,"  and  the  humiliation  of  the  one  was 

•Lite  and  Times  of  Danf«!  O'Connrll,  by  C. 
M.  O'Ktete.  Vol.  II ,  pp.  728-9. 


amply  compensated  by  the  more  than  kingly 
honors  of  the  other.  Nevertheless,  it  is 
quite  certain  that  at  this  period— indeed 
ever  since  the  advent  of  Lord  Heytesbury  to 
Ireland— the  tide  of  O'Connell's  popularity 
was  insensibly  lapsing  and  ebbing  from  him. 
To  accelerate  its  motion,  a  very  ingenious 
device  was  adopted  by  the  deadly  enemies 
of  Irish  liberty.  Highly  respectable  men, 
of  great  influence  and  large  property — men 
allied  to  the  aristocracy  of  the  country — 
joined  the  Repeal  movement.  The  thought- 
less people  rejoiced  at  their  adhesion,  and 
their  appearance  in  Conciliation  Hall  was 
hailed  with  shouts  of  transport.  But  the 
rising  of  these  men  amongst  the  Repealers, 
like  that  of  certain  constellations  at  sea,  was 
but  the  signal  of  storm  and  wreck.  This 
was  inevitable — they  belonged  to  that  class 
who  have  strong  material  interest  in  main- 
taining the  present  state  of  things.  One  of 
these  was  the  son  of  a  Protestant  bishop, 
the  owner  of  large  landed  property  in  the 
North  of  Ireland— Grey  Porter.  He  pub- 
lished a  pamphlet,  immediately  after  join- 
ing the  Association,  which  delighted  Davis 
and  all  the  young  men  of  Ireland,  for  he 
propounded  that  Ireland  ought  to  have  a 
national  militia  of  one  hundred  thousand 
men.  To  a  people  like  the  Irish,  "delighting 
in  wars  '• — the  most  military,  and  therefore 
the  most  unfortunate  people  in  Europe — 
such  a  proposal  was  in  the  highest  degree 
seductive  and  gratifying  "  Honor  to  Mr. 
Porter,"  exclaimed  Davis,  "for  having  had 
the  manlines-s  to  propose  what  thousands 
thought  but  spoke  not."  Porter  seized 
upon  the  weak  point  in  the  Irish  character, 
and  became  for  a  time  eminently  popular. 
He  conjured  up  visions  of  military  glory 
which  enchanted  the  poetic  minds  of  young 
and  cultivated  men.  ***** 

Porter's  pamphlet  attracted  general  at- 
tention, and  as  a  consequence  his  secession 
made  great  noise  ;  and  a  world  of  discussion 
ensued  which  was  not  serviceable  to  the 
cause  of  Repeal.  Many  were  at  a  loss  to 
account  for  1'orter's  conduct.  It  was  rather 
surprising,  they  said,  that  this  son  of  a 
Protestant  bishop  who  had  accumulated 
vast  wealth  by  the  excoriation  of  Catholic 
poverty,  should  be  so  scrupulously  careful  of 
the  money  of  the  "Popish  Repealers. "  It 
was  certainly  a  tendency  which  did  not  run 
in  his  blood.  In  the  meantime,  however, 
the  minds  of  many  were  filled  with  suspicion 
and  doubt,  and  great  damage  was  done  to 
the  Repeal.  The  enemy  was  enabled  to 
fling  bitter  taunts  at  the  Association  and 
tarnish  patriotism  with  the  imputation  of 
sordid  motives.  The  whole  affair  contribu- 
ted powerfully  to  break  vp  what  Sir  Robert 
Peel  termed  a  "formidable  confederacy 
against  British  government  and  British  con- 
nexion." 

When   the  leader  of  a  political  organiza- 


184 


THE       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


tion  has  failed  in  achieving  the  political 
rights  which  for  years  he  has  struggled  to 
gain  for  his  country,  and  when  the  men 
who  stood  by  him  begin  to  doubt  his  ability 
to  make  their  rulers  redeem  the  promises 
he  has  made  to  his  own  people  — then  it 
may  truly  be  said  that  the  dry-rot  of  poli- 
tical decay  is  destroying  that  party.  Such 
was  the  case  in  1844-5,  the  time  when 
"great  dama«e  was  done  to  Repeal,"  and 
when  bo  h  the  enemies  of  O'Connell  and 
the  friends  of  physical  force  were  contri- 
buting—by different  courses  of  procedure — 
"  to  break  up"  the  last  remnants  that  re- 
mained of  the  Repeal  Association. 

About  this  time,  as  if  to  add  additional 
fury  to  the  waters  which  lashed  around  the 
base  of  the  rock  of  Irish  politics,  a  Letter 
or  Rescript  was  received  from  the  Sacred 
CoLege,  declaring  that  whereas  it  had  been 
reported  to  hia  Holiness  that  some  of  the 
more  ardent  patriots  among  the  Irish  Priest- 
hood had  become  absorbed  in  politics  and 
had  spoken  too  rashly  in  public  concerning 
affairs  of  State,  they  were  requested  there- 
after to  attend  more  exclusively  to  their 
religious  duties  and  to  leave  the  angry  agi- 
tation of  politics  to  persons  in  civil  life. 

This  is  the  Rescript  regarding  which  the 
author  under  review  says  that  O'Connell, 
"in  the  agony  of  his  soul  uttered  his  famous 
cry  :  '  As  much  religion  as  you  please  from 
Rome,  but  no  politics.'"  The  "agony  of 
soul"  in  this  instance  at  least,  is  entirely  a 
myth  !  Daniel  O'Connell  never  experi- 
enced any  such  "agony"  over  the  Papal 
document,  nor  did  he  ever  give  utterance  to 
the  "/jmc/ws  cry"  attributed  to  him  !  The 
sentiment  "  as  much  religion  as  you  please 
from  Rome,  but  no  politics,"  was  given  ex- 
pression to  by  O'Neill  Daunt,  a  member  of 
the  Repeal  association,  at  a  meeting  of  that 
body  held  in  Dublin  in  the  year  1845,*  and 
thus  we  remove  from  the  hallowed  memory 
of  Ireland's  Liberator  the  foul  blemish 
which  bigotry  and  ignorance  have  cast  upon 
it  by  attributing  to  him  words  he  never 
used. 

When  once  the  tide  of  popularity  begins 
to  ebb  away  from  a  popular  patriot  whose 
star  is  on  the  wane,  it  does  not  take  long 

*Sie  Life  and  Times  of  O'Conne'l,  by  C.  M. 
O'Keefe,  Vol.  II.,  pa,<e  734. 


until  he  finds  himself  standing  almost  soli- 
tary and  alone  upon  a  barren  strand.  Such 
was  O'Connell's  fate.  In  addition  to  the 
elements  of  discord  which  already  existed 
in  the  Repeal  ranks,  Sir  Robert  Peel's  god- 
less College  Bill  proved  a  regular  apple  of 
discord  among  the  divided  Irish  patriots. 
Thomas  Davis  and  his  friends  were  enthu- 
siastic advocates  for  these  colleges  which 
were  purposely  contemplated  for  the  sole 
object  of  secularizing  education.  O'Con- 
nell, the  Catholic  Bishops  and  Clergy,  as 
well  as  the  bulk  of  the  laity  were  opposed 
to  what  O'Connell  called  "  the  young  blood 
of  Ireland,"  and  the  result  was  to  widen 
still  wider  the  fatal  gap  which  separated  in 
hate  the  people  that  should  have  been 
united  in  love.  This  was  the  last  nail  in 
the  coffin  of  the  Repeal  movement. 

Thomas  Davis  died  in  1845,  and  the 
death  of  this  great  and  gifted  Irish  patriot 
nearly  broke  O'Connell's  heart.  He  saw  in 
him  a  successor  to  himself,  as  the  great 
leader  of  the  Irish  people,  and  the  high  es- 
teem in  which  the  Liberator  held  the 
patriot-poet  may  be  judged  from  the  follow- 
ing extract  from  a  letter  which  O'Connell 
sent  to  the  Repeal  Association  when  he 
heard  of  the  death  of  Davis  : 

Writing  to  the  Repeal  Association,  he 
alludes  to  this  fatal  event  in  the  following 
touching  words  :  "I  do  not  know  what  to 
write.  My  mind  is  bewildered  and  my 
heart  afflicted.  The  loss  of  my  beloved 
friend— my  noble-minded  friend — is  a  source 
of  the  deepest  sorrow  to  my  mind.  What  a 
blow — what  a  cruel  blow — to  the  cause  of 
Irish  nationality  !  He  was  a  creature  of 
transcendent  qualities  of  mind  and  heart. 
His  learning  was  universal—  his  knowledge 
was  as  minute  as  it  was  general  And  then 
he  was  a  being  of  such  incessant  energy  and 
continuous  exertion.  I,  of  course,  in  the 
few  years— if  years  they  be — still  left  to  me, 
cannot  expect  to  look  upofc  his  like  again  or 
to  see  the  place  he  has  left  vacant  adequate- 
ly tilled  up.  And  I  solemnly  declare  that 
I  never  knew  any  man  who  could  be  so 
useful  to  Ire 'and  in  the  present  state  of  her 
struggles.  His  loss  is  indeed  irreparable. 
What  an  example  he  was  to  the  Protestant 
youths  of  Ireland  !  What  a  noble  emula- 
tion of  his  virtues  ought  to  be  excited  in 
the  Catholic  young  men  of  Ireland.  And 
his  heart,  too  !— it  was  as  gentle,  as  kind,  as 
loving  as  a  woman's.  Yes  !  it  was  as  ten- 
derly kind  as  his  judgment  was  comprehen- 


THE      POPE      AND      IHKLAND. 


185 


sive  and  his  genius  magnificent.  We  shall 
lung  deplore  his  loss.  As  1  stand  alone  in 
the  solitude  of  my  mountains,  many  a  tear 
shall  I  shed  iu  the  memory  of  that  noble 
youth.  Oti  !  how  vain  are  words  or  tears 
when  such  a  national  calamity  afflicts  the 
country.  Put  me  down  among  the  fore- 
most contributors  to  whatever  monument  or 
tribute  to  his  memory  shall  be  voted  by  the 
National  Association  Never  did  they  per- 
form a  more  imperative  or — alas  !  -  so  sad  a 
duty.  I  can  write  no  more— my  tears 
blind  me  ;  and  after  all, 

'  Fungor  inani  munere.'" 
Early  in  October,  1845,  the  first,  dark 
shadows  of  impending  Famine  began  to 
hover  over  Ireland  All  thoughts  of  repeal 
of  present  unjust  laws,  or  of  retribution  for 
past  political  wrongs,  vanished  from  the 
minds  of  the  masses  of  the  people.  Self- 
preservation  became  the  ruling  passion, 
and  the  spirit  of  patriotism  languished  under 
the  repulsive  presence  of  starvation.  The 
result  may  easily  be  conjectured.  The  Re- 
peal association  went  into  the  last  throes  of 
dissolution.  Conciliation  Hall  reverberated 
with  rancorous  expressions  which  sowed  the 
dragon's  teeth  of  disunion  in  many  an 
honest  Irishman's  breast,  and  thus  Ireland 
became  again  a  corpse  upon  the  dissecting 
table  of  England. 

On  January  26th,  1846,  O'Connell  took 
his  departure  from  Dublin,  accompanied  by 
his  sons  Maurice  and  John.  He  went  to 
London,  entered  the  House  of  Commons  in 
order  to  try  and  wring  even  an  atom  of  jus- 
tice from  the  English  Government  in  order 
to  save  his  people  from  falling  victims  to 
famine.  But  the  only  answer  he  received 
was  the  proposition  to  pass  a  Coercion  Bill ! 
This  drastic  measure,  however,  was  defeated, 
the  Tories  resigned  and  the  Whigs  came 
into  power— and  then  the  political  cauldron 
in  Ireland  was  set  to  bubbling  and  boiling 
over  to  such  an  extent  that  Repeal  and 
O'Connell  were  both  almost  entirely  for- 
gotten. 

About  this  time  (1846)  a  rupture  occurred 
between  O'Connell  and  Snath  O'Brirn, 
which  brought  the  latter  gentleman  into 
prominence  and  relegated  O  Connell  to  the 
tomb  of  the  Capulets.  To  make  matters 
more  rapidly  approach  a  crisis  difficulties 
sprung  up  in  the  Repeal  meetings,  held  in 
Conciliation  Ha'l,  between  Thomas  Francis 


Meagher  and  Smith  O'Brien  on  one  side, 
and  O'Connell  and  his  son  John  on  the 
other,  which  ultimately  led  to  an  open 
rupture  by  the  withdrawal  from  the  asso- 
ciation of  a  large  number  of  Repealers  who 
held  "  Young  Ireland"  views,  and  whose  de- 
parture from  the  Hall  caused  tears  to  flow 
from  many  an  Irish  eye  that  witnessed  the 
sad  scene. 

These  turbulent  scenes  were  so  many 
swords  of  sorrow  which  pierced  O'Connell'a 
heart  and  ultimately  hastened  his  death. 
He  was  prostrated  by  a  general  breaking 
up  of  hia  system.  His  physicians  recom- 
mended rest  and  medical  treatment,  but  all 
was  unavailing,  for  what  remedy  can 

"  Pluck  from  the  memory  a  hidden  sorrow, 
Razi  out  the  writtea  troubles  of  the  brain." 

O'Connell  determined  to  make  a  pilgrim 
age  to  Rome,  to  kneel  at  the  feet  of  the 
Sovereign  Pontiff,  and  to  ask  the  blessing 
of  the  saintly  successor  of  St.  Peter— Pope 
Pius  IX.  He  was  accompanied  on  his  voy- 
age by  his  son  Daniel  and  Rev.  John  Miley, 
as  his  chaplain,  and  had  proceeded  as  far 
as  Genoa,  when,  on  the  15th  of  May,  just 
as  the  glorious  sun  had  set,  the  great  heart 
of  Irel  nd's  Liberator  ceased  to  beat,  and 
Ireland  lost  one  of  her  truest  and  best  sons. 
According  to  his  last  wish  his  heart  was 
placed  in  an  urn  and  sent  to  Rome,  where 
it  still  rests  in  the  Church  of  St.  Agatha, 
his  body  was  conveyed  back  to  Ireland,  and 
his  soul  winged  its  flight  to  the  bosom 
of  that  God  Who  gave  it  life  on  earth,  and 
—  every  Catholic  will  pray  that  it  has  long 
since  secured  life  everlasting. 

It  is  to  the  causes  we  have  succinctly 
alluded  to  that  we  must  look  for  the  death 
of  the  Repeal  movement.  Its  dissolution 
could  neither  be  marred  nor  made  by  any 
Rescript  from  Rome  to  the  few  Priests  who, 
unwittingly,  were  too  radical  in  their  public 
speeches.  The  Pope  had  neither  hand, 
act  nor  part  in  precipitating  the  Repeal 
movement  down  the  precipice  which  changes 
in  popular  opinion  prepared  for  it,  and 
into  which  it  would  have  inevitably  fallen 
even  had  O'Connell  lived  for  a  dozen 
years  longer.  There  are  peculiar  fashions 
in  politics  just  as  there  are  in  personal  dress, 
and  Ireland  in  1845  was  becoming  tired  of 
waiting  for  moral  force  to  produce  a  bene- 


186 


THE      POIVE      AND      IRELAND. 


tieial  change  in  the  prospects  of  the  coun- 
try. Disappointed  and  driven  to  despair, 
the  young  blood  of  the  Island  deserted 
O'Connell,  and  when  the  Young  Ireland 
Party  was  born  the  Repeal  Association  drew 
its  last  breath— as  the  natural  result  of  the 
loss  of  its  political  vitality. 


WAS    THE    "YOUNG    IRELAND"    MOVEMENT 
KILLED  BY  BISHOPS  AND  PRIESTS? 

The  malicious  intent  of  Judge  Maguire's 
book  may  easily  be  surmised  when  it  is 
known  that  he  attributes  the  failure  of 
every  plan  adopted,  both  in  ancient  and 
modern  days,  for  the  amelioration  of  Ire- 
land, to  the  secret  or  open  opposition  of 
either  the  Pope  or  the  Bishops  and  Priests 
of  Ireland.  Such  a  sweeping  condemn  tion 
of  Popes,  Prelates  and  Priests  exposes  every 
apostate  who  adopts  it  to  the  suspicion  that 
he  merely  desires  to  revenge  himself  upon 
the  Church  he  has  abandoned,  hence  he 
c  res  not  how  reckless  soever  his  charges 
may  be  so  Jong  as  he  can  make  '  Home 
howl,"  and  sow  the  seeds  of  antipathy  to 
hpiritual  authority  in  the  hearts  of  Irish 
Citholics. 

The  "  Young  Ireland"  movement  of 
1848,  following  so  closely  upc --i  ;'•;,•>  failure 
of  Daniel  O'Connell,  and  the  hundreds  of 
thousands  who  believed  in  moral  suasion  as 
the  best  argument  wherewith  to  win  back 
Ireland's  freedom  from  the  grasp  of  Eng- 
land, was  doomed  to  failure  from  its  very 
inception. 

In  the  first  place  the  Irish  people  were 
demoralized,  disunited,  disappointed  and 
cast  down  into  despair  by  the  death  of 
O  Connell  and  the  calamitous  failure  of  his 
constitutional  movement. 

In  the  next  place  the  people  had  just 
passed  through  the  excruciating  agonies  of 
famine  and  pestilence,  and  the  majority  of 
the  agricultural  population  of  Ireland  were 
so  reduced  to  poverty,  and  so  emaciated  by 
starvation,  that  they  had  neither  the  cour- 
age nor  the  confidence  to  take  any  active 
part  in  the  new  physical  force  programme 
advocated  by  John  Mitchel  and  those  who 
sided  with  him  in  his  insurrectionary  move- 
ment. 

It   must  be  also  borne  in  mind  that  the 


foundation  upon  which  Mitchel  and  his 
compatriots  based  their  plans  for  Ireland's 
freedom  was  designed  after  that  adopted  in 
Paris  when  King  Louis  Philippe  was  torn 
from  the  throne  of  France.  The  Dublin 
Nation  up  to  this  time  had  been  the  organ 
of  all  the  Irish  writers  of  both  prose  and 
poetry  phrased  in  patriotic  sentiments,  but 
John  Mitchel's  language  and  suggestions 
to  the  people  begun  at  last  to  be  too  inflam- 
matory and  too  dangerous  to  permit  their 
pub'ication  in  the  columns  of  the  Nation, 
and  so  he  and  several  other  members  of  the 
Nation's  staff  seceded  and  issued  a  more 
radical  journal  under  the  captivating  tit'e 
of  the  United  Irishman. 

The  columns  of  the  new  weekly  were 
filled  with  full  directions  for  street  warfare 
wherein  molten  lead  was  to  be  poured  down 
upon  the  devoted  heads  of  the  enemy,  and 
every  column  contained  matter  calculated 
to  arouse  the  Irish  people  to  insurrection. 
This  style  of  literature  led  to  a  split  in  the 
"Young  Ireland''  party,  one  wing  being  led 
by  Mitchel,  and  the  more  moderate  wing 
being  under  the  leadership  of  William 
Smith  O'Brien,  whilst  the  O'Connellites 
looked  askance  upon  both  wings  of  the  new 
organization  as  men  who  were  not  in  their 
right  senses. 

The  Catholic  Prelates  and  Priests  of  Ire- 
land looked  upon  the  "Young  Ireland" 
movement  from  its  very  inception,  with 
grave  doubts  as  to  its  propriety  according  to 
the  standard  of  patriotism  always  held 
sacred  by  the  Irish  Catholic  people.  In 
the  language  of  A.  M  Sullivan,*  "  they 
fancied  they  saw  in  this  movement  too 
much  that  was  akin  to  the  work  of  the  Con- 
tinental revolutionists,  and,  greatly  as  they 
disliked  the  domination  of  England,  they 
would  prefer  it  a  thousand  times  to  snch 
''Liberty''  as  Carbonari  would  procliim." 

"At  that  time,"  continues  the  distin- 
guished Irish  patriot  from  whom  we  quote, 
"in  1848,  the  power  of  the  Catholic  Priests 
was  unbroken,  ivas  stronger  than  ever."  It 
would  seem  from  this  evidence,  therefore, 
that  no  "Papal  influences,"  thus  far  had 
materially  affected  Ireland's  Priesthood,  so 

*New  Ireland,  page  123. 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


187 


far  at  least   as  their  love  for  their  native 
land  was  concerned. 

The  result  of  the  deluge  of  inflammatory 
literature  which  the  active  intellect  of  the 
extreme  revolutionary  element  in  the 
"  Young  Ireland"  party  poured  over  the 
country,  was  the  arrest  of  Mitchel,  Meagher 
and  O'Brien.  Mitchel  was  tried,  convicted 
and  transported  for  fourteen  years,  and  the 
others  subsequently  shared  his  fate.  Thus 
ended  the  Irish  insurrectionary  movement 
of  '48,  under  the  segis  of  the  "  Young  Ire- 
land" party. 

From  the  foregoing  facts  it  will  be  ap- 
parent to  all  impartial  readers  that  the 
"  Young  Ireland"  party  was  not  killed  by 
the  Bishops  and  Priests  of  Ireland.  It  was 
a  clear  case  of  self-destruction.  Its  pro- 
moters adopted  the  anti- Catholic  tactics  of 
the  clubs  of  Paris  and  the  Carbonari  of 
Italy.  Secrecy  ruled  every  society  within 
the  organization,  and  the  cause  of  its  defeat 
and  demise  arose  from  the  fact  that  Ireland 
was  not  prepared  for  *ny  gunpowder  war- 
fare in  the  streets  of  her  cities,  nor  did  the 
masses  of  the  people  have  any  sympathy 
with  the  Continental  system  upon  which  it 
was  based. 

The  wisdom  of  the  Bishops  and  Priests 
in  Ireland  in  keeping  aloof  from  this  move- 
ment was  dictated  entirely  by  prudence  and 
not  prompted  by  any  lack  of  patriotism. 
They  saw  failure  stamped  upon  it  from  its 
inception,  and  their  action  saved  many  a 
life  from  being  uselessly  sacrificed  through 
the  evidence  of  Government  spies.  Because, 
as  A.  M.  Sullivan  testifies, t  '•'the  Govern 
ment  were  well  informed  throiiyh  spies  of 
everything  that  was  passing,"  and  all  the 
plots  and  conspiracies  of  the  "  Young  Ire- 
land" party  were  revealed  to  the  authorities 
of  Dublin  Castle  almost  as  soon  as  they 
were  told  with  great  secrecy  in  the  club- 
rooms  of  the  insurrectiotary  organization. 

•\Neio  Ireland,  page  125. 


Few  people  can  appreciate  the  terrib  e 
misery  inflicted  on  Ireland  by  the  wild  rush 
for  revenge  which  animated  the  men  of  '48, 
and  which  ended  in  depriving  the  Irish 
cause  of  many  of  its  most  ardent  patriots. 
The  closing  scene  in  this  direful  drama  is 
thus  depicted  by  A.  M.  Sullivan. £ 

"Throughout  the  remaining  months  of 
the  year  (1848)  Ireland  was  given  over  to 
the  gloomy  scenes  of  special  commissions, 
State  trials,  and  death  sentences.  Of  the 
leaders  or  prominent  actors  in  this  abortive 
insurrection,  O'Brien,  Meagher,  Mac- 
Man  us,  Martin  and  O'Doherty  were  con- 
victed ;  Dillon,  O  Gorman  and  Doheny  sue-  • 
ceeded  in  accomplishing  their  escape  to 
America.  O'Brien,  Meagher  and  Mac- 
Manus,  with  one  of  their  devoted  com- 
panions in  danger,  Patrick  O'Donoghue  by 
name,  having  been  convicted  of  high 
treason,  were  sentenced  to  death,  but  by 
authority  of  a  specially-p  ssed  Act  of  Par- 
liament, the  barbarous  penalty  of  hanging, 
disemboweling  and  quartering,  to  which 
they  were  formally  adjudged,  was  com- 
muted into  transportation  beyond  the  seas 
for  life.  Duffy  was  thrice  brought  to  trial ; 
but  although  the  Crown  made  desperate 
f  fforts  to  effect  his  conviction,  the  prosecu- 
tion each  time  broke  down,  baffled  by  the 
splendid  abilities  of  the  defence  conducted 
by  Mr.  Isaac  Butt,  Q.  C.  Eventually  the 
proceedings  against  him  were  abandoned. 
Of  less  important  participators  numbers 
were  evicted,  and  hundreds  fled  the  coun- 
try never  to  return.  '  Forty-eight'  cost 
Ireland  dearly — not  alone  in  the  sacrifice  of 
some  of  her  best  and  noblest  sons,  led  to 
imm  late  themselves  in  such  desperate 
enterprise  as  revolution,  but  in  the  terrible  . 
reaction,  the  prostration,  the  terrorism,  the 
disorganization  that  ensued.  Through 
many  a  long  and  dreary  year  the  country 
suffered  for  the  delirium  of  that  time." 

+  Ntw  Ireland    pp.  129-30. 


188 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


CHAPTER     XXXIV. 


Secret  Polital  Societies. — Their  Baneful  Influence  upon  Ireland's  Struggles  for  Free- 
dom.— Reasons  why  the  Church  Opposes  them. — The  Wisdom  of  Her  Oppo- 
sition Proved  by  Numerous  Examples. 


The  stern  and  continuous  opposition  of 
the  Catholic  Church  to  oath-bound  Secret 
Societies  is  a  fact  well-known  all  over  the 
world.  It  matters  not  to  her  whether  such 
organizations  are  based  upon  bigotry  or 
benevolence,  or  that  the  objects  set  forth 
for  attainment  are  founded  on  patriotism  or 
politics — the  Church  alike  places  the  ban  of 
her  disapproval  upon  all  congregations  of 
individuals  who  are  sworn  to  secrecy  in  or- 
der ts  conspire  against  the  Christian  citadel 
of  Salvation,  against  the  State,  or  any  sec- 
tion of  human  society. 

The  Catholic  Church  is  inspired  by  Al- 
mighty God  in  the  wisdom  which  she  dis- 
plays for  the  moral  and  spiritual  guidance 
of  her  children,  and  even  her  enemies  have 
been  compelled  to  admit  that  in  her  rigid 
opposition  to  all  oath- bound  secret  societies 
she  has  won  the  admiration  of  men  who 
otherwise  never  could  be  brought  to  ac- 
knowledge her  as  truly  God's  spiritual  guide 
for  all  mankind. 

Every  wise  mother  is  careful  not  to  per- 
mit her  children  to  fall  a  prey  to  wicked 
companions.  The  hen  hides  beneath  her 
wings  her  chickens  from  the  vulture  and  the 
hawk.  And  for  far  more  cogent  Christian 
reasons  —a  desire  to  save  the  temporal  hap- 
piness as  well  as  the  spiritual  lives  of  the 
flock  of  Christ— the  Church  warns  her  chil- 
dren not  to  enter  any  secret  societies  where 
their  lives,  their  liberty,  their  sacred  honor 
and  their  Catholic  conscience  might  be 
jeopardized. 

Looking  at  the  baneful  influences  which 
oath-bound  secret  political  associations 
have  exercised  upon  both  the  politics  and 
the  people  of  Ireland  during  the  past  cen- 
tury, the  Catholic  Prelates  of  that  country 
have  wisely  placed  the  seal  of  the  condem- 
nation of  the  Church  upon  all  such  organi- 
zations. From  the  rebellion  of  1798  down 


to  the  present  day,  there  never  has  been 
any  amelioration  of  Ireland's  condition 
gained  through  the  operation  of  oath-bound 
secret  society  agencies.  On  the  contrary, 
it  is  safe  to  say  that  more  harm  has  accrued 
to  individuals,  to  families,  and  to  the  for- 
tunes of  Ireland  herself,  from  such  combina- 
tions than  from  any  other  cause  in  connec- 
tion with  Ireland's  numerous  struggles  for 
political  supremacy. 

THE   SOCIETY   OF   UNITED   IBISHMEN. 

In  order  to  demonstrate  the  evils  which 
befell  the  Society  of  United  Irishmen  a  cen- 
tury ago,  during  Ireland's  memorable 
struggle,  we  extract  from  the  best  and  most 
authentic  work  on  that  important  era,  some 
passages  which  will  furnish  indisputable 
evidence  on  that  point. 

Speaking  of  the  Irish  Rebellion  of  1798, 
Dr.  Richard  R.  Madden*  says  : 

"  The  history  of  the  Rebellion  of  1798, 
like  that  of  every  other  civil  war,  whatever 
traits  of  heroism  may  be  discovered  in  the 
conduct  of  individuals,  is  a  record  of  crimes 
and  sufferings,  which  it  is  not  for  the  in- 
terest of  the  people  and  their  rulers  should 
be  buried  in  oblivion,  however  appaling  its 
details.  The  evils  that  are  inseparable  from 
civil  war,  require  only  to  be  regarded  by 
both  orders  as  calamities  which  extend  far 
beyond  the  event  of  success  or  failure,  and 
involve  considerations  of  higher  importance 
than  those  which  are  ordinarily  taken  into 
account,  either  by  those  parties  who  rush 
into  revolt,  or  the  powers  who  resist  the 
just,  or  even  the  unreasonable,  demands  of 
the  people.  It  is  indeed  impossible  to 
exaggerate  the  evils  of  civil  war  ;  but  it  is 
possible  to  overrate  the  prospective  advan- 
tages which  are  calculated  on  from  its  suc- 
cess, and  to  overlook  the  sufferings  which 
are  the  inevitable  consequences  of  its  failure. 

"It  is  not  alone  in  the  deadly  conflict, 
in  the  outrages  on  humanity  committed  in 
the  frenzy  ot  popular  commotion,  or  party 
violence,  or  lawless  power,  that  these  evils 
are  to  be  met  with.  The  direst  of  them, 

*The  United  Irithmen,  Fiiat  Series,  pp.  406-7. 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


189 


the  most  revolting  and  humiliating  to  the 
feelings  of  all  right-minded  men,  are  to  be 
found  in  the  perfidious  wickedness  of  those 
wretches  who  rise  in  troubled  times  to  the 
surface  of  socit  ty  from  the  obscurity  in 
which  their  misutiievoua  propensities  had 
previously  lain  innoxious.  These  are  the 
men  whom  the  people  in  revolt  must  expect 
to  find  earliest  in  their  ranks,  the  most 
prominent  in  their  societies,  violent  in  their 
councils,  conspicuous  where  there  is  security, 
and  backward  where  tnere  is  danger,  and 
who,  while  urging  on  their  associates,  skulk 
behind  them,  and  bide  their  own  time  to  be- 
tray them  to  their  enemies. 

1 '  These  are  the  men  whom  the  leaders  of 
the  people  must  expect  to  meet  in  their 
secret  assemblies,  to  mingle  with  in  private, 
to  suffer  the  obtrusive  familiarity  of,  unre- 
buked— whose  intemperate  activity  it  is 
ever  a  task  of  difficulty  to  restrain,  whose 
vicious  courses  they  cannot  or  dare  not  in- 
terfere with,  whom  they  vainly  imagine  to 
find  steadfast  in  their  cause  in  the  times 
and  troubles  which  try  men's  souls,  and 
eventually  encounter  in  the  courts  of  jus- 
tice, or  trace  to  the  portals  of  the  people  of 
authority,  shrinking  from  observation,  and 
lurking  about  the  offices  of  the  underlings 
of  state. 

"  These  are  the  men  whom  the  agents  of 
government  find  fit  and  proper  persons, 
when  "  the  times  are  out  of  joint,"  to  de- 
feat the  objects  of  those  who  are  inimical 
to  their  principles  or  their  power  —wretches 
whom  it  is  easy  to  corrupt,  being  generally 
not  only  infamous  and  dissolute  in  their 
lives,  but  singularly  open  and  scandalous  in 
their  infamy.  The  employment  of  such 
men.  makes  it  necessary  to  treat  them  with 
consideration,  to  take  the  tutelage  of  their 
testimony  into  charge,  to  condescend  to  hold 
confidential  communications  with  them,  to 
wink  at  their  iniquities,  to  seem  unconscious 
of  their  venality,  to  work  upon  their  vanity, 
to  exaggerate  their  preposterous  opinions  of 
their  own  importance,  and  to  conceal  the 
viler  features  of  their  treachery  under  the 
veil  of  a  solicitude  for  the  interests  of  jus- 
tice or  the  welfare  of  their  country.  If  an 
alliance  with  such  men  involve  their  con- 
federates in  danger,  the  tute'a^e  of  their 
testimony  cannot  be  otherwise  than  revolt- 
ing to  the  feelings  of  their  employers.  It 
is  impossible  to  come  in  contact  with  them 
without  loathing  the  individuals  whose  ser- 
vices are  called  into  requisition. 

"  In  either  case  the  consequences  of  the 
confidence  that  is  betrayed,  or  the  corrup- 
tion that  is  practiced,  and  the  use  that  is 
made  of  the  infamous  agency  of  spies  and 
informers,  are  such  that  it  is  hard  to  say 
whether  the  danger  attendant  on  the  former, 
or  the  degradation  on  the  latter,  is  the  evil 
most  to  be  apprehended  or  deplored. 


"  By  the  reports  of  the  Secret  Committees 
of  the  Lords,  in  1703,  and  of  both  Houses  of 
Parliament  in  1797,  it  appears  that  the 
Government  at  a  very  early  period,  had  a 
knowledge  of  the  conspiracy  carried  on  by 
the  United  Irish  Societies  in  the  provinces 
of  Leinster  and  Ulster,  though  not  of  the 
persons  who  formed  the  directory  of  the 
former  province.  A  regular  system  if 
espionage  was  adopted  so  early  as  1795;  and 
in  1796  there  were  few  secrets  of  the  United 
Irishmen  which  were  not  in  the  hands  of 
the  Government.  It  seems  to  be  one  of 
the  necessary  results  of  efforts  to  establish 
secret  societies,  that  the  more  the  a  crecy 
of  their  proceedings  is  sought  to  be  secured 
by  tests  and  oaths,  the  more  danger  ia  in- 
curred of  treachery,  and  the  more  difficult 
it  is  to  guard  against  traitors ;  the  very 
anxiety  for  concealment  becomes  the  imme- 
diate occasion  of  detection.  *  *  *  * 

"  Mr.  Frederick  Dutton,  who  at  an  early 
period  was  employed  in  the  North  as  an  in- 
foffcner,  and  had  been  sent  especially  to 
Maidstone  to  insure  the  conviction  of 
O'Connor,  was  a  regular  informer  of  this 
class,  a  most  reckless  one  in  the  case  of  the 
unfortunate  Priest  Quigley,  in  whose  great- 
coat pocket,  by  mistake  for  Arthur  O'Con- 
nor's, was  placed  the  treasonable  papers  on 
which  he  was  convicted.  Mr.  M'Gucken, 
the  solicitor  of  the  United  Irishmen,  was 
another  of  the  private  informers,  who  was 
intrusted  with  the  defence  of  the  prisoners 
charged  with  treason  ia  Belfast,  and  at  the 
same  period  was  in  the  pay  of  the  Govern- 
ment— was  largely  paid,  and  ultimately 
pensioned  ;  and  during  these  frightful  times 
M'Gucken  continued  to  possess  the  confi- 
dence of  the  United  Irishmen. 

"For  upwards  of  twelve  months  before  the 
breaking  out  of  the  rebellion  several  mem- 
bers of  the  Ulster  United  Irish  Society  were 
likewise  in  the  pay  of  the  Government. 
John  Edward  Newell  entered  on  his  duties 
at  the  Castle  the  13th  of  April,  1797,  and 
retired  from  them  rather  abruptly,  the  Gth 
of  February,  1798.  Nicholas  Maguan,  of 
Saintfield,  in  the  County  of  Down,  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Provincial  and  County  Com- 
mittees, and  also  described  in  the  report  of 
1798  as  a  colonel  of  their  military  system, 
during  the  whole  of  1797,  and  down  to 
June,  1798,  regularly  attended  the  meetings 
of  the  County  Down  United  Irish  Societies, 
and  communicated  to  the  Earl  of  London- 
derry's chaplain,  the  Rev.  John  Cleland,  a 
magistrate  of  that  county,  the  treasonable 
proceedings  of  those  societies  after  each 
meeting.  *  *  *  * 

"  Such  were  the  well-timed  measures 
adopted  by  the  Irish  Govemment  to  cause 
the  insurrection,  in  Lord  Castlereagh's 
words,  '  to  explode,'  when  the  mischievous 
designs  of  the  United  Irishmen  had  been 


190 


THE       POPE       AND       IttELAND. 


long  known  to  that  Government,  and  so 
fully,  that  one  of  its  leading  members  de- 
clared in  Parliament,  '  that  the  State  pris- 
oners had  confessed  nothing  which  hud  not 
been  known  to  them  before.' " 


THE  SOCIETY   OF  RIBBONMEN. 

This  plain  and  straightforward  statement 
is  sufficient  to  demonstrate  the  danger  which 
lurks  in  all  societies  of  a  similar  character, 
but  in  order  still  further  to  show  the  dan- 
gerous character  of  such  organizations  we 
will  quote  the  sentiments  of  the  great  Irish 
Prelate,  Bishop  Doyle,  of  Kildare  and 
Leighlin,  on  the  Ribbonmen* 

'•  The  Society  of  Ribbonmen  had,  a  few 
years  previously  (1819)  first  sprung  into 
vitality.  Originally  formed  in  the  West  of 
Ireland,  it  gradually  worked  its  secret  way 
and  influence  until  the  confines  of  Dr. 
Doyle's  diocese  were  struck  by  it.  Some 
acts  of  violence  on  person  and  property 
having  been  committed,  the  Bishop  devoted 
several  pages  of  his  first  Pastoral  to  an  elo- 
quent denunciation  of  the  objects  of  the 
society.  He  concluded  with  a  most  ar- 
gumentative dissuasive,  which,  though 
erudite  and  logical,  was  clothed  in  a  sim- 
plicity of  language  that  rendered  it 
thoroughly  intelligible  to  the  masses.  The 
appeal  thus  terminated  :  '  Beloved  brethren, 
we  tell  you  in  truth  and  sincerity  that,  these 
associations  are  opposed  to  all  your  inter- 
ests, both  temporal  and  eternal ;  that  the 
oath  which  unites  them  is  illegal,  sacri- 
legious and  unjust ;  that  if  observed,  it 
would  be  a  bond  of  iniquity  ;  and  that 
though  it  would  be  a  crime  to  take  it,  it 
would  be  a  still  greater  ciiine  to  observe  it 
by  word  or  deed  ;  and  hence  we  conjure 
you  by  all  that  is  dear  to  you,  your  family, 
your  character,  your  country  and  your  reli- 
gion, to  avoid  all  connection  with  these  de- 
luded men,  and  if  any  of  you  have  been 
ensnared  by  them,  to  abandon  their  society 
to  repent  for  the  sins  you  committed  in 
joining  them,  and,  like  Paul,  'you  will  ob- 
tain mercy,  because  it  was  through  ig- 
norance you  did  evil.'  But  if  there  should 
be  found  amongst  you  any  persons  who, 
disregarding  these  salutary  instructions  and 
advice,  and  who  would  still  continue  to  set 
at  defiance  the  laws  of  God  and  the  coun- 
try, who  would  still  continue  to  expose  our 
good  name  to  disgrace,  our  religion  to  ob- 
loquy, and  these  dioceses,  with  their  peace- 
able inhabitants,  to  terror  and  taxation,  let 
such  persons  take  notice,  and  we  hereby 
solemnly  warn  and  admonish  them  that  we 

*Life  of  Dr.  Doyle  by  W.  FUzpatrksk,  Vol.  L, 
p.  123. 


shall,  in  case  they  continue  obstinate,  re- 
sort to  the  severest  chastisements,  which 
the  power  vested  in  us  from  above  enables 
us  to  inflict."  ***** 

The  great  Prelate  who  uttered  these 
words  of  con  ^emnation  was  one  of  the  purest, 
the  best,  and  the  most  persistent  among 
Irish  patriots  of  his  time.  But  he  well 
knew  the  dangerous  tendencies  <>f  such  so- 
cieties and  his  experience  led  him  to  pub- 
licly denounce  them  hot  only  in  the  year 
1819,  but  also  at  a  subsequent  period  when 
that  grand  Irish  Bishop  thus  addressed  the 
misguided  members  of  his  flock  for  joining 
the  "  Defenders" — which  was  only  another 
change  of  name  for  the  "  Ribbonmen." 

''But  your  object  is  to  make  your 
country  free  and  happy.  We  will  not 
reason  with  you  on  the  end  which  you  pro- 
pose to  yourselves,  which,  even  it  it  were 
laudable,  could  not  justify  the  employment 
of  unlawful  means,  'as  evil,'  says  an  apos- 
tle, '  is  not  to  be  done  that  good  may  hap- 
pen;'  but  we  will  consider  for  a  moment 
your  design  itself,  and  the  persons  em- 
ployed to  carry  it  into  execution,  that  if 
possible  the  absurdity  as  well  as  the  wicked- 
ness of  it  may  become  palpable  to  you. 
And  first,  who  are  those  who  would  under- 
take to  subvert  the  laws  and  constitution  of 
this  country?  Persons  without  money, 
without  education,  without  arms,  without 
counsel,  without  discipline,  without  a  leader; 
k'ept  together  by  a  bond  of  iniquity  which 
it  is  a  duty  to  violate  and  a  crime  to  ob- 
serve ;  men  destitute  of  religion  and  aban- 
doned to  the  most  frightful  passions,  having 
blasphemy  in  their  mouths  and  their  hands 
filled  with  rapine,  and  oftentimes  with 
blood.  Can  such  as  these  regenerate  a 
country  and  make  her  free  and  happy  ?  No, 
dearest  brethren  ;  left  even  to  themselves 
they  would  destroy  each  other,  but  opposed 
to  a  regular  force,  they  would  scatter  like  a 
flock  of  sheep  upon  a  mountain  when  a 
thunderstorm  affrights  them."t 

It  is  not  necessary  to  moralize  upon  these 
sterling  sentiments  of  the  great  '•  J.  K.  L.," 
so  we  will  proceed  at  once  to  inform  our 
readers  why  the  Catholic  Church  opposed 

THE   FENIAN   ORGANIZATION. 

Already  we  have  shown  how  the  ranks  of 
the  "  Young  Ireland"  party  were  filled  with 
spies,  and  as  the  Fenian  organization  was 
the  natural  offshoot  of  the  "  Young  Ire- 
land" and  the  "  Phoenix  Club"  movements, 

fLife  and  Timea  of  Dr.  Doyle,  pp.  212-13. 


THE       POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


191 


it  naturally  occurnd  to  the  Bishops  and 
Priests  of  Ireland  that  a  large  number  of 
innocent  people  would  be  placed  at  the 
mercy  of  paid  spies  and  perjured  informers 
in  the  employ  of  the  English  Government 
if  the  Fenian  organization  were  permitted 
to  propagate  itself  throughout  the  country. 
Nor  were  the  Bishops  and  Priests  of  Ireland 
alone  in  their  opposition  to  the  new  secret 
society.  Such  unblemished  patriots  as 
Smith  O'Brien,  John  Mitchel,  A.  M.  Sulli- 
van, John  B.  Dillon,  Charles  Gavan  Duffy, 
Kevin  Izod  O  Doherty  and  a  very  large 
proportion  of  the  best  and  purest  patriots 
then  in  Ireland,  were  utterly  opposed  to 
any  plan  entailing  secrecy  upon  its  parti- 
cipants, for  the  good  and  sensible  reason 
that  traitors  would  in  time  hand  innocent 
men  over  to  the  British  authorities — and 
thus  work  injury  to  the  cause  of  Ireland  as 
well  as  bring  life-long  sorrow  upon  i.umerous 
innocent  individuals. 

Skibbereen  in  the  county  of  Cork  was 
the  cradle  of  Fenianism,  and  the  "  Phoenix 
National  and  Literary  Society"  was  the 
nucleus  of  the  organization,  James  Stephens 
being  its  sponsor.  The  secret  object  of  this 
new  organization  was  to  drill  Irishmen  in 
military  tactics  and  the  manual  of  arms, 
then  to  supply  them  with  the  munitions  of 
war  from  this  country,  and  ultimately  to 
send  over  from  America  five  or  ten  thou- 
sand men  to  invade  Ireland  and  to  be  as- 
sisted by  "  the  men  in  the  gap,"  who  were 
to  fight  to  the  death  for  Ireland's  freedom. 
This  was  a  very  heroic  programme,  but  it  is 
far  easier  to  theorize  on  such  important 
affairs  of  military  prowess  than  it  is  to  carry 
them  in  all  their  perfection  into  practical 
operation. 

The  great  Irish  National  organ,  the  Dub- 
lin Nation  came  out  boldly  in  opposition  to 
this  oath-bound  secret  organization,  and 
inasmuch  as  the  author  of  Ireland  and  the 
Pope  has  tried  to  cast  odium  on  the  charac- 
ter of  the  deceased  Bishop  Moriarty,  of 
Kerry,  we  will  let  Mr.  A.  M.  O'Sullivan 
give  us  the  full  version  of  that  Prelate's  in- 
terference against  the  Fenian  movement, 
so  as  to  counteract  the  garbled  account  in 
the  book  under  review.  Speaking  of  the 
notoriety  which  the  Phoenix  Society  was 
beginning  to  attract  through  floating  rumors 


of  the  connection  of  some  eminent  Irish 
patriots  with  its  principles,  Mr.  Sullivan 
says : 

"Meanwhile  a  new  urgency  appeared. 
The  Catholic  Bishop  of  Kerry,  the  Most 
Rev.  Dr.  Moriarty,  called  upon  me  one  day 
to  say  that  within  the  past  hour  he  had 
heard  from  a  Government  official  a  minute 
account  of  the  '  Phojnix  Society'  conspiracy 
in  his  diocese.  'It  is  no  use  pooh-poohing 
such  work,'  said  he  :  '  the  Government  are 
preparing  to  treat  it  seriously,  and  are  in 
1  ossexsion  of  full  information  A  friendly 
warning  through  the  Nation  may  disperse  the 
whole  danger,  and  bring  these  young  men 
back  to  reason.  At  all  events  you  will  save 
others  from  being  involved  in  the  catas- 
trophe.' "* 

Bishop  Moriarty 's  conduct  on  this  occasion 
was  that  of  a  worthy  Christian  Bishop  who 
had  the  best  interests  of  his  flock  at  heart. 
This  Prelate  well  knew  from  experience  the 
sad  fate  which  had  overtaken  and  ruined 
hundreds  of  families  in  Ireland  by  means  of 
secret  political  organizations  which  looked 
very  patriotic  to  the  unsuspecting  victims, 
but  which  proved  to  be  so  many  traps  set 
by  designing  informers  in  order  to  lodge  in 
prison  the  best  sons  of  the  suffering  Irish 
tenantry  and  thus  entail  destitution,  exile 
and  death  upon  many  a  disrupted  family 
which  hitherto  had  enjoyed  lives  of  rural 
peace  and  domestic  happiness. 

Mr.  Sullivan's  interview  with  Bishop 
Moriarty  resulted  in  placing  the  Nation  in 
direct  antagonism  to  the  Fenian  organiza- 
tion, and  the  manner  of  its  opposition  can 
best  be  told  by  that  distinguished  patriot 
himself  in  the  following  extracts  :t 

"  I  hesitated  no  longer  ;  I  not  only  pub- 
lished Mr.  O'Brien's  Tetter,  as  he  desired, 
but  in  strong  terms  appealed  to  patriotic 
Irishmen  to  avoid  the  hopeless  perils  and  the 
demoralizing  effects  of  secret  societies.  I  was, 
in  the  same  sense  as  the  national  leaders  had 
ever  been,  as  "seditious"  as  any  of  them  in  • 
my  hostility  to  the  imperial  scheme  of  de- 
stroying our  national  autonomy,  but  I  had 
not  studied  in  vain  the  history  of  secret  oath- 
bound  associations.  I  regarded  them  with 
horror.  I  knew  all  that  could  be  said  as  to 
their  advantages  in  revolutionizing  a  coun- 
try ;  but  even  in  the  firmest  and  best  of 
hands  they  had  a  direct  tendency  to  de- 

*New  Ireland,  p.  275.    f275-6    J323-4. 


192 


THE      POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


moralization,  and  were  often,  on  the  whole, 
more  "xrilmts  to  society  than  open  tyranny. 
In  joining  issue  on  this  occasion  with  the 
hidden  chiefs  of  the  movement,  1  kuew  I 
was  setting  a  great  deal  on  the  cast ;  yet  1 
did  not  know  all.  No  acti  n  of  my  life  bore 
consequences  more  full  of  suffering  and 
sacrifice  for  me  than  did  this  throughout 
subsequent  years.  Conducting  such  a  journal 
as  the  Nation,  I  had  no  choice  as  to  silence. 
An  equivocal  attitude  would  have  bean  des- 
picably mean  and  cowardly.  1  was  called 
upon  to  speak  and  act,  under  not  only  the 
public  but  the  conscientious  constraint  of 
duty,  and  I  did  so.  The  result  proved  that 
the  influence  of  the  Nation  had  been  under- 
rated ;  or,  perhaps,  I  should  say,  its  in- 
fluence in  co  operation  with  the  appeals  of 
the  Catholic  clergy.  The  enrolment  was 
stopped,  and  it  se?med  for  a  while  as  if  the 
movement  had  been  relinquished." 

Mr.  Sullivan  devotes  a  chapter  to  the 
Fenian  movement,  and  in  order  that  our 
readers  may  fully  understand  the  opposition 
which  that  organization  met  with  from  many 
of  Ireland's  truest,  stanchest,  and  wisest 
friends,  we  cull  from  the  chapter  before  us 
the  following  extracts  bearing  immediately 
on  the  causes  which  entailed  the  condemna- 
tion of  the  Church  upon  this  oath-bound 
body  :J 

"There  were  in  1858,  on  the  startirg  of 
this  enterprise,  several  Irish- American  news- 
papers ardent  y  devoted  to  the  cause  of  Irish 
nationality.  In  New  York  city  alone  there 
were  at  least  two  ;  one  was  the  the  Irish 
News,  established  by  Thomas  Francis 
Meagher ;  the  other  the  Irish- American, 
then,  as  now,  the  leading  organ  of  Irish 
Nationalism  in  the  United  States.  Even 
with  these  journals  the  Fenian  leaders 
quarrelled  as  strongly  as  with  the  Nation ; 
so  they  decided  to  establish  a  special  organ 
of  the  movement,  which  accordingly  ap- 
peared as  the  Phoenix  newspaper,  in  New 
York.  In  this  journal  they  struck  out  vig- 
orously, right,  left,  and  centre,  at  every- 
thing and  everybody  supposed  to  be  inimical 
to  their  undertaking.  They  had  no  need  to 
waste  words  in  rousing  the  ire  of  their  read- 
ers against  England.  The  Irish  in  America 
—the  maddened  fugitives  of  the  dreadful 
famine  and  eviction  times — hated  the  British 
power  with  quenchless  hate.  The  obstacles 
that  most  concerned  the  secret  leaders  arose 
from  opposition  given  to  their  scheme  by 
the  Catholic  clergy  and  the  open-policy  or 
anti-Fenian  Nationalists.  The  Catholic 
Church  condemns  oath-bound  secret  societies, 
— especially  if  directed  to  the  subversion  of 
the  civil  power  or  the  overthrow  of  religion, 
— for  several  reasons.  First,  regarding  the 


sanctity  of  an  cath,  it  denies  that  any  cne 
who  chooses  can,  for  any  purpose  he  pleases, 
formally  administer  or  impose  that  solemn 
obligation  Secondly,  having  regard  to  the 
safety  of  society,  <i  public  order,  of  morals 
a~d  religion,  it  prohibits  the  erection  of  any 
such  barrier  between  the  objects  and 
operations  of  a  society,  and  authoritative  ex- 
amination and  judgment.  Over  this  critical 
and  important  issue  the  Fenian  inurement, 
on  its  very  threshold,  was  plunged  into  a 
bitter  war  with  the  ecclesiastical  authorities 
of  the  Catholic  Church  "  The  Priest  has 
no  right  to  interfere  in  or  dictate  our 
politics,"  s:ii •'.  the  Fenian  loaders;  "ours  is 
ap-'litical  in  \  "iuent ;  they  must  not  question 
us  or  .imped j  us."  "You  cannot  be  ad- 
mitted to  the  sacraments  until  you  give  up 
and  repent  of  illicit  oaths,"  responded  the 
Catholic  Priests  ;  "  and  if  you  contumaciously 
'  continue  in  membership  of  an  oath- bound 
secret  society,  you  are  liable  to  excommuni- 
cation." "Do  you  hear  this  ( — we  are  cursed 
by  the  Church  for  loving  our  country  !"  ex- 
claimed the  Fenians  ;  and  so  fur  the  first 
five  years,  from  1860  to  1865,  the  struggle 
between  the  Catholic  clergy  and  the  Fenian 
organizers  was  fierce,  violent,  and  unsparing. 
A  ;eally  active  "B,"  or  Fenian  centra,  had 
need  to  be  a  man  who  cared  little  for  the 
Priest's  denunciations,  and  who  could  per- 
suade the  people  it  was  "  the  Maynooth  oath 
and  the  gold  of  England  "  that  made  Father 
Tom  so  ready  to  "curse"  the  cause.  The 
Priests,  accordingly,  complained  that  the 
propagators  of  Fenianism  were  men  who 
pa'd  little  regard  to  clerical  authority  and 
shunned  the  practices  of  faith.  One  can  see 
how  out  of  antagonistic  views  thus  pressed 
the  quarrel  eventuated  in  the  Fenians  de- 
nouncing the  Priests  as  deadly  foes  of  Irish 
natio  -ality,  and  the  Priests  denouncing  the 
Fenians  as  enemies  of  the  Church, --men 
who  would  overthrow  the  altar  and  destroy 
society. 

"Very  similar  was  the  conflict  between  the 
secret  organization  and  the  non- Fenian  or 
anti- Fenian  Nationalists ;  the  great  object  of 
the  Fenian  leaders  being  that  the  people 
should  have  no  alternative  patriotic  effort 
between  embracing  their  enterprise  and 
siding  with  imperial  subjugation.  Indeed, 
a  reference  to  the  pages  of  the  Fenian  news- 
papers, and  to  the  public  chronicles  of  the 
period,  will  show  that  tho  movement  during 
the  four  years  following  I860  was  directed 
less  against  the  English  Government  than 
against  those  Irish  Nationalists,  Priests  and 
laymen,  whose  influence  was  supposed  to 
impede  the  organization." 

From  the  foregoing  extract  it  will  be  dis- 
cerned at  once  that  the  onslaught  made  on 
the  Catholic  Church  by  certain  unwise 
leaders  among  the  Fenians  could  only  re- 


THE       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


193 


suit  in  the  destruction  of  the  party  who 
proposed  to  free  Erin  by  means  which 
were  not  in  accord  with  the  Christian  senti- 
ments of  those  most  interested  in  the 
struggle — the  Catholic  Prelates,  Priests  and 
people  of  Ireland  resident  in  that  land. 
The  folly  of  such  opposition  to  the  Church 
was  subsequently  clearly  understood  by  re- 
flecting members  of  the  organization,  and 
the  very  attitude  of  antagonism  to  the 
Church  which  was  assumed  served  to  weaken 
the  force  of  Fenianism  from  the  first  mo- 
ment of  its  existence. 

The  author  of  New  Ireland  very  clearly 
points  out  the  fact  that  at  every  stage  of 
the  conspiracy  through  which  the  Fenian 
organization  passed  in  Ireland,  the  British 
Government  had  for  its  spies  and  informers 
the  most  trusted  members  of  the  organiza- 
tion itself.  He  describes  the  cause  of  the 
suppression  of  the  Irish  People,  the  treason 
of  Pierce  Nagle,  and  the  arrest  of  the  prin- 
cipal leaders,  and  then  he  adds  :* 

"  It  was  not  the  power  and  arms  of  the 
British  Government  alone  that  operated  to 
disorganize  and  destroy  the  Fenian  move- 
ment. Dissension  and  revolt  among  its 
leaders  broke  its  power.  Before  two  years 
Stephens  was  the  object  of  fierce  denunciation 
from  his  own  followers,  and  John  O'Mahony 
was  deposed  and  degraded  by  the  Senate  of 
the  American  Branch,  over  which  he  had  so 
long  presided.  In  each  case  the  dethroned 
or  impeached  leaders  had  numerous  partisans, 
so  that  the  unity  of  the  organization  on  each 
side  of  the  Atlantic  was  at  an  end." 

Mr.  Sullivan  next  passes  under  review 
the  "insurrection"  of  March  5th,  1867, 
when  the  Fenian  circles  undertook  to  rise 
in  their  might  and  make  an  end  of  Ireland's 
political  misery  forever.  But  here,  as  in 
all  other  attempts  made  to  free  Ireland  by 
means  of  oath- bound  compatriots,  the  spy 
and  the  informer  spoiled  the  plans  of  the 
patriots  at  the  very  moment  they  sought  to 
bring  them  to  a  happy  consummation. 
John  Joseph  Corydon  was  one  of  James 
Stephens'  most  trusted  agents  ;  he  was  not 
only  very  high  in  the  Fenian  Councils,  but 
he  was  also  very  deep  in  the  pay  of  the 
British  Government— to  whom  he  furnished 
every  secret  that  the  organization  most 
carefully  guarded  under  the  impressive 
form  of  a  forbidden  oath. 
*New  Ireland,  p.  369. 


Fenianism,  therefore,  furnishes  us  with 
another  evidence  of  the  wisdom  of  the  Cath- 
olic Church  in  putting  the  ban  of  her  con- 
demnation upon  oath-bound  secret  associa- 
tions of  a  political  character,  not  one  of 
which  gained  anything  for  Ireland — save  the 
disgrace  and  distress  caused  by  the  blood- 
hounds who  "  sold  the  pass"  to  the  British 
Government. 

WAS    THE    HOME    KULE    MOVEMENT    OPPOSED 
BY   THE    CHURCH  '{ 

One  of  the  prime  objects  for  issuing  the 
book  under  review  seems  to  have  been  the 
deliberate  misrepresentation  of  the  Pope 
and  the  Bishops  and  Priests  of  Ireland 
upon  every  question  connected  with  efforts 
to  restore  the  nationality  of  that  long-suf- 
fering land.  No  proofs  are  offered  in  jus- 
tification of  any  criticisms  upon  the  Church, 
but  she  is  set  down  as  the  deadly  enemy  of 
Ireland's  aspirations  for  freedom,  even 
though  such  efforts  were  grounded  upon  the 
laws  of  the  gospel  of  Christ.  The  falsity  of 
such  a  charge  has  already  been  made  mani- 
fest in  these  pages,  and  now  we  will  pro- 
ceed to  illustrate  still  further  the  vicious 
veaality  which  prompted  such  a  groundless 
accusation. 

The  author  under  review  says  that  "the 
finger  of  Rome"  kept  back  the  Catholic 
clergy  in  Ireland  during  the  early  stages  of 
the  Home  Rule  movement.  But  the  real 
cause  which  operated  in  keeping  the  Irish 
Bishops  and  clergy  in  abeyance  for  a  few 
months,  may  be  found  in  the  fact  that  they 
first  desired  to  ascertain  whether  the  new 
plan  of  political  action  was  based  upon 
Christian  and  constitutional  laws,  or  was  it 
merely  a  continuation  of  the  secret  schemes 
which  so  recently  had  brought  exile,  desti- 
tution, ignominy  and  death  to  so  -many 
brave  patriots  who  were  literally  sold  into 
penal  servitude  by  the  paid  spies,  iniquitous 
informers  and  treacherous  traitors  of  their 
own  race. 

As  soon,  however,  as  it  was  made  mani- 
fest to  the  ever-faithful  Prelates  and 
Priests  of  Ireland  that  the  Home  Rule 
movement  was  based  on  legitimate  lines  of 
political  agitation,  that  moment  they  gave 
it  their  heartiest  co-operation,  and  the  vast 


194 


THE      POl'K       AND      IRELAND. 


majority  of  them  have  stood  by  the  stan- 
dard of  Home  Rule  ever  since.  This  fact 
is  well  known  to  every  intelligent  indivi- 
dual and  is  a  sufficient  negative  answer  to 
the  question  propounded  above. 

WAS     THE     LAND     LEAOUK    OPPOSED    BY   THE 
POPE  ? 

In  the  work  under  review  we  are  told 
that  it  was,  and  the  author  cites,  in  proof 
thereof,  the  following : 

I. — Archbishop  VlcCabe  puhlished  some  Pas- 
toral Letters  condemning  the  Land  League  asi- 
t  it  ion. 

II.  —Archbishop  McCabe  was  subsequently 
elevated  to  the  ecclesiastical  dignity  of  a  Cardi- 
nal. 

TIL-  On  the  ?0th  of  January,  1883,  Pope  L<  o 
XIII.,  sent  a  Retcript  to  the  Irish  Clergy  com- 
niandir.g  them  to  suppress  a  certain  clans  of  so- 
cieties, the  description  being  broad  enough  to 
include  the  Irish  political  leagues. 

IV. —  On  May  llth,  of  the  same  year,  the 
Pope  issued  a  more  powerful  and  mandatory 
Rescript  condemning  and  forbidding  disaffection 
t «  the  Government,  and  forbidding  subscriptions 
to  the  Parneil  Testimonial  Fund. 

I.  The  assertion  that   Archbishop  Mc- 
Cabe published  Pastorals  against  the  Land 
League   agitation— even   admitting  that'he 
did  so  — is  no  proof  that   Pope   Leo.    XIII. 
opposed  the  Land   League.      Nor  does  the 
fact   that   Archbishop    McCabe    was  after- 
wards made  a  Cardinal  indicate  in  the  least 
that  such   elevation   was  caused  by  his  al- 
leged  Pastorals   antagonistic    to  the   Land 
League.     So  much  on  these  points. 

II.  We  now   come    down  to   January, 
1883,  when  Pope  Leo   XIII.,    it  is  said,  is- 
sued a   Rescript  to  the  Irish  Clergy,  com- 
manding them  to  suppress  a  certain  class  of 
si  cieties,  the  description  being  broad  enough 
to  include  the  Irish  Land  League. 

Here  is  "the  truth,  the  whole  truth  and 
nothing  but  the  truth,"  concerning  the 
Pope's  actions  and  utterances  regarding  the 
L  ind  League,  as  we  find  them  recorded  in  a 
most  impartial  work  by  a  disinterested 
author  :* 

''The  condition  of  the  frish  Catholics, 
who  comprise  over  four  fifths  of  the  whole 
population  of  Ireland,  naturally  attracted 

*Pope  Leo  XIII.  His  Life  and  Letters. 
Compiled  bv  Rev.  J  ames  F.  Talbot.  Boston  : 
1886.  Pp.  230-36. 


the  attention  of  the  Pope  at  this  time.  It  is 
not  necessary  to  enter  here  into  any  de- 
scription of  the  state  of  Ireland  in  the  years 
following  the  coronation  of  Leo  XIII. 
Everybody  is  familiar  with  the  story  of  that 
home-rule  agitation  which  begun  to  assume 
definite  form  after  the  famine  of  1879-80, 
and  the  general  election  of  the  latter  year  ; 
and  which,  though  it  has  not  yet  obtained 
the  goal  of  its  desires,  is,  nevertheless, 
morally  certain  of  winning  for  the  Irish  peo- 
ple the  inestimable  boon  of  legislative  auton- 
omy. When  the  Land  League  first  began 
its  crusade  against  alien  landlordism,  Eng- 
land resorted  to  all  sorts  of  dishonest 
methods  to  create  the  impression  at  Rome 
that  the  Irish  Catholics  were  being  tainted 
with  heresy  and  false  ideas.  It  was  said  that 
they  were  becoming  perverts  to  the  erroneous 
doctrines  of  socialism  ;  that  they  refused  to 
pay  their  just  debts  ;  that  they  w»re  no 
longer  disposed  to  obey  their  Priests  and 
Bishops  ;  and  that,  in  fact,  unless  some  effec- 
tive barrier  were  soon  interposed,  they  would 
lose  their  faith  altogether,  and  become  lost 
to  the  Church. 

"  Naturally  such  reports  as  these,  which 
English  landlords  took  good  care  to  get  for- 
warded to  Rome,  troubled  Pope  Leo  not  a 
little  ;  and  hence  he  summoned  the  Bishops 
of  Cashel,  Emly,  Limerick,  Cloyne,  Ross, 
and  Ksrxy,  to  Rome,  to  consult  with  them 
concerning  the  situation  in  Ireland.  The 
patriotic  Dr.  Croke,  the  Archbishop  of 
Cashel,  took  upon  himself  the  defence  of  the 
Irish  agitators ;  and  he  assured  the  Holy 
Father  that  there  was  little  or  no  truth  in 
the  alarming  rumors  that  English  agents  had 
so  sedulously  spread  in  Rome.  He  pointed 
out  that  all  the  great  reforms  that  had  in 
the  past  been  won  in  Ireland  were  carried 
by  just  such  means  as  the  Irish  people  were 
now  employing  to  destroy  alien  landlordism 
and  English  misrule ;  and  he  assured  his 
Holiness  that  there  was  not  the  slightest 
danger  of  the  Irish  people  either  losing  their 
faith,  or  relaxing  that  attachment  which  had 
hitherto  knit  them  so  to  closely  the  Holy  See. 
'  Two  things,'  said  the  Holy  Father,  '  weigh 
much  upon  my  mind,  and  are  all-important 
in  this  question.  The  first  is  the  preserva- 
tion of  the  Catholic  faith  among  the  Irish 
people.  Upon  this  point,'  continued  his 
Holiness,  '  I  confess  I  have  less  anxiety  ; 
for  the  past  history  of  Ireland  is  a  pledge 
for  the  future,  and  I  have  no  fear  that  the 
Irish,  who  have  preserved  their  faith  through 
centuries  of  misfortune,  will  ever  abandon 
it.  The  second  is  the  union  of  the  Bishops 
and  clergy  with  their  people,  and  the  impera- 
tive necessity  that  no  revolutionary  princi- 
ples should  be  introduced  or  allowed  to  take 
root  among  them.'  Dr.  Croke  and  the  other 
Irish  Prelates  assured  the  Pope  anew  that 
there  was  not  the  slightest  danger  of  a  revo- 


THE      POPK       AND      IRELAND. 


195 


lutioii  occurring  in  Ireland.     They  pointed 
out  to  him,  that  the  Irish  people  were  now 
ei>  gaged   in   a   peaceful  and   constitutional 
agitation      for     the     acquisition      of     their 
rights  ;  and,  as  they  believed  that   by  such 
an   agitation   they    would   eventually    win, 
there  was  nothing  to  dread  on  the   score  of 
an  armed   uprising  against  the  authorities, 
even  if  everybody    was  persuaded   that  the 
laws  such  authorities  enforced    were  unjust 
and  tyrannical  ones.     The  Holy  Father  had 
several   audiences   with   the  Irish    Prelates 
during  their  stay  in  Home  ;  and    he  assured 
them  that  his  sympathies   and   good    wishes 
went  out  to  Ireland,  to  the  fidelity  of  whose 
people  to  the   faith  and   the  Apostolic   See 
he    bore   willing  and   eloquent    testimony. 
Later  on,   the   Pope   again  called  the  Irish 
Bishops  to  Home,  for  consultation  with  them 
on  the  Irish  situation  ;  but  of  that  more  in 
its  proper  place.      Early  in  1881,   Cardinal 
McCabe,    Archbishop   of   Dublin,  since  de- 
ceased, communicated  to  his  clergy  the  text 
of   a   most   important   Letter   addressed  to 
him   on   the  3rd    of   January   by  the  Holy 
Father.      The  Archbishop  asks:    'In  what 
terms  does  the  Holy  Father  address  himself 
to  us]      An  attempt  may  be  made  to  dis- 
tort his  words,    and   to  make  it  appear  that 
the  Holy   See  is   hostile  to  the  demand   of 
the  country   for  the  repeal  of  harsh  laws. 
which    have     brought    misery    and    crime 
amongst  us  for  long  generations.      Is  this 
the  object  of  the  Letter  of  the  Holy  Father  ? 
Most  certainly  not.      He  knows  the  injuries 
inflicted  on  our  people  by  the  present  land 
code,  and  he  prays  that  these  injuries  may 
be   speedily   redressed   by   a  change  in  the 
laws  from  which  they  flow  ;    but   whilst   he 
blesses  our   determination  to   obtain  justice 
for  an  oppressed   tenantry,   there  are  in  the 
agitation,  as  carried  on,  things  which  he  can 
not  approve.      No  better  exponent  of  the 
Holy   Father's   views   can  be  had  than  the 
Holy  Father  himself,  who  draws  a  wide  dis 
tinction   between  the    end   aimed   at,   and 
some   of   the  means   employed   to  achieve 
that  end.'      And  then  the  Archbishop  tells 
how,    in   his  audience  with  the  Pope,   '  his 
Holiness   did  not  in  any  way  disapprove  of 
the  people  seeking  by  legitimate  and  constitu- 
tional  means  the  redress  of  their  grievances;' 
but  he  said  that  '  in  the   present  agitation, 
as  it  is  carried   on,  there  are  certain  things 
done  which  I  cannot  approve  of.      The  peo- 
ple,' he  said,  'should  be  encouraged  in  doing 
what  is  right,  but  they  should  be  duly  im- 
pressed with  the  duty  of   keeping  always 
within  the  bounds  of  law  and,  religion. '     The 
words   of   the   last  paragraph   in  the  Arch- 
bishop's letter  are  perhaps  the  most  vitally 
important   of  all.      Regretfully    writes  his 
Grace:    "Rumors  to   which   we   would  be 
unwilling   to   give   credence  are  already  in 
circulation,    that   the  scheme   about   to  be 


proposed  by  Government  for  the  settli- 
ment  of  the  land  question  will  be  but  a 
halfhearted  attempt  to  grapple  with  the 
evil  they  wish  to  cure.  This  would  be  a 
deplorable  misfortune.  Unless  the  cancer 
which  has  been  eating  away  the  life  of  the 
nation  be  cut  out  to  the  last  fibre,  health 
and  security  never  can  be  restored,  and 
sooner  or  later  the  disastrous  scenes  of  to- 
day will  return,  but  with  increased  vio- 
lence.' Dr.  McCabe  calls  the  evil  of  the 
present  land  system  '  a  cancer  eating  into 
the  life  of  the  nation,  which  must  be  cut  out 
to  the  last  fibre,  or  health  and  security  can 
never  be  restored.'  'A  halfhearted  at- 
tempt' to  grapple  with  it,  Archbishop  Mc- 
Cabe designates  as  'a  deplorable  misfoi- 
tune.'  " 

THE    POPE'S    LETTER. 

TO  OUK  VENERABLE  BROTHER,  EDWARD  M  CABF, 
ABCHBISHOP  OF  DUBLIN,  PRIMATE  OK  IB1- 
LAND  — 

Venerable  Brother :  —  Health  and  Apostol:c 
Benedic  ion.  We  read  with  pleasure  yoi  r 
Letter  recently  addressed  to  the  clergy  ai.d 
people  of  the  Diocese  of  Dublin,  and  presented 
to  Us  by  you  when  you  were  in  Rome ;  for  in  it 
We  recognized  your  prudence  and  moderatior, 
since,  while  Ireland  is  now  deeply  moved,  pai'- 
ly  by  a  desire  of  better  things,  partly  by  a  fear 
of  an  uncertain  future,  you  offer  counsel  admit  • 
ably  suited  to  the  occasion. 

The  unhappy  condition  of  Catholics  in  Ireland 
disquiets  and  afflicts  Us  ;  and  We  highly  esteem 
their  virtue,  sorely  tried  by  adversity  not  for  a 
brief  period  only,  but  for  many  centuries.  For, 
with  the  greatest  fortitude  and  constancy,  they 
preferred  to  endure  every  misfortune  rather 
than  forsake  the  religion  of  their  fathers,  or 
deviate  in  the  slightest  degree  from  their  ancient 
tidelily  to  the  Apostolic  ?ee.  Moreover,  it  is 
their  singular  glory,  extending  down  to  tl  e 
present  time,  that  most  noble  proofs  of  all  the 
other  virtues  were  never  wanting  amnngst  their. 
Thet-e  reasons  force  Us  to  love  them  with  patt-i- 
nal  btnevolence,  and  fervently  to  wish  that  the 
evils  by  which  they  are  afflicted  may  quickly  be 
brwught  to  an  end. 

At  the  same  time,  We  unhesitatirgly  declare 
that  it  is  their  duty  to  be  carefully  on  their 
guard  not  to  allow  the  fame  of  their  sterling 
and  hereditary  probity  to  be  lessened,  and  not 
to  commit  any  rash  act  whereby  they  may  e*  pin 
to  have  cast  aside  the  obedience  due  their  law- 
ful rulers  ;  and  for  this  reason,  whenever  IreUnd 
was  greatly  excited  in  guarding  and  defending 
her  own  interests,  the  Roman  Pontiffs  constant- 
ly endeavored  by  admonition  and  exhortation 
to  allay  the  excited  feelings,  lest,  by  a  disregard 
of  moderation,  justice  might  be  violated,  or  the 


196 


THE       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


cause,  however  right  in  itself,  might  be  forced 
by  the  influence  of  passion  into  the  flame  of 
sedition.  These  counsels  were  also  directed  to 
the  end  that  the  Catholics  of  Ireland  should  in 
all  things  follow  the  Church  as  a  guide  and 
teacher ;  and,  thoroughly  conforming  them- 
selves to  her  precepts,  they  should  reject  the 
allurements  of  pernicious  doctrines.  Thus  the 
Supreme  Pontiff  Gregory  XVI.,  on  the  12th  of 
March,  1839,  and  on  the  15;h  of  October,  1844, 
through  the  Sacred  Congregation  of  the  Propa- 
ganda, admonished  the  Archbishop  of  Armagh 
to  do  nothing  except  with  justice  and  modera- 
tion. And  We,  following  the  example  of  Our 
predecessors,  took  care  on  the  l*t  of  June 
last  year,  as  you  are  aware,  to  give  to  all  the 
Bishops  of  Ireland  the  salutary  admonitions 
which  the  occasion  demanded ;  namely,  that 
the  Irish  people  bhould  obey  the  Bishop.",  and  in 
no  particular  deviate  from  the  sacredness  of 
duty.  And  a  little  later,  in  the  mouth  of 
November,  We  testified  to  some  Irish  Bishops 
who  had  come  to  visit  the  tombs  of  the  Apostles, 
that  We  ardently  desired  every  good  gift  for 
the  people  of  Ireland  ;  but  We  also  added,  that 
order  should  not  be  disturbed. 

This  manner  of  thinking  and  acting  is  entire- 
ly conformable  to  the  ordinances  and  laws  of 
the  Catholic  Church,  and  We  have  no  doubt 
that  it  will  conduce  to  the  interests  of  Ireland. 
For  We  have  confidence  in  the  j  ustice  of  the 
men  who  are  placed  at  the  head  of  the  State, 
and  who  certainly,  for  the  most  part,  have  great 
exparience,  combined  with  prudence  in  civil 
affairs.  Ireland  may  obtain  what  she  wants, 
much  m"re  safely  and  readily,  if  only  she  adopts 
a  course  which  the  laws  allow,  and  avoids  giving 
causes  of  offence. 

Therefore,  venerable  brother,  let  you  and  your 
colleagues  in  the  Episcopate  direct  your  efforts 
to  the  end  that  the  people  of  Ireland,  in  this 
anxious  condition  of  affairs,  do  not  transgress 
the  bounds  of  equity  and  justice.  We  have  as- 
suredly received  from  the  Bishops,  the  Clergy, 
and  the  people  of  Ireland,  many  proofs  of  rever- 
ence and  affection ;  and  if  now,  in  a  willing 
spirit,  they  obey  these  counsels  and  Our  au- 
thority, as  We  are  certain  they  will,  they  may 
feel  assured  that  they  have  fulfilled  their  own 
duty,  and  have  completely  satisfied  Us. 

Finally,  from  Our  heart  We  implore  God  to 
lo  >k  down  propitiously  on  Ireland ;  and  in  the 
meantime,  as  a  pledge  of  heavenly  gifts.  We 
affectionately  impart  in  the  Lord  the  Apostolic 
Benediction  to  you,  venerable  brother,  to  the 
other  Bishops  of  Ireland,  and  to  the  entire 
Clergy  and  people. 

Given  at  St.  Peter  s,  Rome,  on  the  third  day 
of  January,  1881,  in  the  third  year  of  Our  Pon- 
tificate. 

LEO  PP.  XIII. 


It  would  be  a  work  of  supererogation  on 
our  part  to  add  any  remarks  to  the  above 
loving  Letter  of  the  Holy  Father  to  the 
Irish  people,  as  its  plain  language,  its 
parental  tone,  its  friendly  expression  and 
its  general  sympathy  for  the  success  of  every 
just  effort  for  Ireland's  amelioration,  proves 
it  to  have  emanated  from  the  feeling  heart 
of  a  Pontiff  who  has  never  for  a  moment 
wavered  in  his  love  for  Ireland  and  her 
valiant,  virtuous  Catholic  people. 

It  is  a  plain  and  palpable  fact,  therefore, 
that  the  Land  League  movement  was  not  op- 
posed by  the  Church,  and  we  joyfully 
pride  ourselves  upon  the  fact  that  the 
foregoing  extracts  are  triumphant  vindica- 
tions of  Pope  Leo's  friendly  attitude  to- 
wards the  Irish  Land  League  when  carried 
on  in  a  legitimate  manner,  and  in  com- 
pliance with  the  laws  of  Christian  morality 
— outside  of  which  no  Catholic  can  venture 
if  he  desires  the  blessing  of  God  and  His 
Church  to  rest  upon  his  struggles  for  Ire- 
land's freedom. 

IV.  Let  us  now  pass  under  review  the 
miscalled  "more  powerful  and  mandatory 
Rescript"  which  our  author  miatakingly  as- 
serts to  have  "condemned  and  forbid  dis- 
affection to  the  British  Government."  This 
document  introduced  with  such  rhetorical 
spleen  and  rabid  virulence  was  not  a  Re- 
script in  any  sense.  It  was  merely  a  sim- 
ple Letter  issued  by  the  Sacred  Congrega- 
tion of  the  Propaganda  to  the  Bishops  of 
Ireland,  and  signed  by  the  Prefect— Cardi- 
nal Simeoni. 

The  text  of  this  Letter  stated  that  it  was 
sinful  to  further  a  just  cause  by  unlawful 
methods.  Thereby  admitting  that  the  cause 
in  which  the  Irish  Land  League  was  en- 
gaged was  ju-st  in  itself,  but  that  some  of 
the  means  employed  to  attain  its  end  were 
not  grounded  on  Christian  justice.  Cardi- 
nal Simeoni  expressed  the  fear  that  cupidity 
had  exercised  its  influence  over  a  portion  of 
the  Irish  people,  that  they  were  adopting 
false  views,  and  that  they  were  seeking  for 
national  prosperity  through  the  instrumental- 
ity of  remedies  which  would  lead  to  crime. 
The  Circular  stated  that  class-hatred  was 
engendered  in  Ireland,  horrible  crimes  were 
not  reprobated,  and  men  were  terrorized 
by  the  threats  of  holding  them  up  as  the 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


197 


enemies  of  Ireland  unless  they  subscribed 
their  money  to  the  fund  in  question.  This, 
in  brief,  is  the  contents  of  the  forty-line 
Circular  which  has  caused  so  much  calumny 
to  be  hurled  at  the  Holy  Father,  who  has 
borne  this  contumely  with  model  Christian 
meekness. 

Now  let  us  see  what  this  Circular  did  not 
condemn.  There  is  not  a  syllable  in  it 
condemning  the  Land  League.  On  the 
contrary,  it  explicitly  states  that  it  is  the 
perfect  right  of  the  Irish  people  to  endeavor 
to  obtain  an  alleviation  of  their  present 
troubles,  and  to  agitate  for  their  political 
rights.  Not  a  word  in  the  Circular  in  con- 
demnation of  Mr.  Parnell  personally,  nor 
a  syllable  of  censure  against  his  political 
policy,  and  the  document  disclaims  any  in- 
tention of  doing  so.* 

There  in  not  a  single  reference  in  the 
Simeoni  Circular  condemnatory  of  the  Fair 
Rent  agitation,  of  the  movement  for  buy- 
ing out  the  Irish  Landlords,  of  Home  Rule, 
the  Land  League,  or  even  entire  Repeal  of 
the  Union  between  Great  Britian  and  Ire- 
land In  fine,  there  is  not  a  single  sentence 
in  this  document  which  justifies  the  ex- 
travagant language  used  in  connection  with 
it  in  the  pages  of  the  publication  whose 
malicious  errors  we  have  so  successfully 
contradicted.  It  is  clear,  therefore,  from 
the  irrefutable  evidence  we  have  adduced, 
that  Pope  Leo  XIII.  did  not  oppose  the 
Irish  Land  League. 

THE  PAPAL  "  RESCRIPT"  OF  1888. 
The  author  whose  book  we  are  reviewing 
seems  to  have  a  weakness  for  calling  every 
document  issued  by  Cardinals  or  Congrega- 
tions in  Rome  by  the  handy  title  of  Rescript, 
so  as  to  designedly  give  them  an  authorita- 
tive prominence  which,  he  vainly  imagines, 
they  might  not  otherwise  possess.  This 
mistake  we  have  heretofore  pointed  out 
and  it  is  only  necessary  for  us  to  do  so 
again,  because  the  so-called  Papal  "Re- 
script" of  the  20fch  of  April,  1888,  which 
our  author  alludes  to,  was  simply  a  Circular 
issued  by  the  Congregation  of  the  Holy 
Office  in  Rome  and  signed  by  Cardinal 
Simeoni.  This  document  was  the  Circular 

*"Quidquid  sit  de  persona  Parnelli  fjusjue 
concilia." 


which  alluded  to  the  "  Plan  of  Campaign'' 
and  "Boycotting"  as  not  being  considered 
justifiable  by  the  Cardinals— according  to 
the  matters  laid  down  for  their  guidance  in 
forming  their  judgment. 

In  the  consideration  of  thia  Circular,  and  • 
in  order  that  our  readers  may  have  a  clear 
and  authoritative  exposition  of  its  real  in- 
tent, force  and  meaning,  we  opine  that  the 
better  way  to  reach  such  a  conclusion  is  to 
publish  the  opinions  of  Most  Rev.  Dr.  Wil- 
liam Walsh,  Archbishop  of  Dublin,  as  that 
distinguished  patriotic  Prelate  expressed 
them  in  an  interview  with  a  representative 
of  the  Dublin  Freeman's  Journal  shortly 
after  the  document  in  question  was  issued  : 

Representative  :  I  am  fortunate,  your 
Grace,  in  being  the  first  on  your  return 
from  Rome  to  hear  what  you  may  have  to 
say  about  the  recent  Rescript,  and  its  bear- 
ings upon  the  public  affairs  of  Ireland. 

The  Archbishop  :  Well,  perhaps  so  ;  but 
I  do  not  think  that  I  have  anything  of  sub- 
stantial importance  to  add  to  what  I  have 
already  written  from  Rome  upon  the  sub- 
ject. Very  soon  after  the  Rescript,  as  you 
call  it,  had  been  published — 

R.  — Your  Grace  will  pardon  me  if  I  ask, 
then,  whether  "  Rescript"  is  not  the  proper 
term  to  use  I 

A. — No;  but  this  is  a  matter  merely  of 
technical  accuracy.  The  word  "Rescript" 
has  a  restricted  technical  sense,  and,  strictly 
speaking,  it  is  not  applicable  in  the  present 
case.  The  document  in  question  should 
rather  be  spoken  of  as  a  "  Decree."  It  is  a 
Decree  or  decision  of  the  Holy  Office,  ap- 
proved by  the  Sovereign  Pontiff.  * 

R. — The  news,  as  your  Grace  no  doubt 
is  aware,  first  appeared  in  a  London  Protest- 
ant newspaper,  a  paper  most  hostile  to  the 
Irish  National  movements.  There  is  in  Ire- 
land, and  also  indeed,  as  a  matter  of  course, 
among  the  Irish  population  in  England,  in 
Scotland,  and  in  America,  a  strong  and 
even  angry  feeling  on  this  point  People 
are  saying  that  whatever  the  Decree  may 
be  in  itself,  the  fact  that  it  was  communi- 
cated for  publication  in  the  first  instance 
through  such  a  channel,  in  a  newspaper 
notoriously  hostile  both  to  the  Land  League 
movement,  and  to  the  Home  Rule  move- 
ment, gives  it  a  decidedly  political  aspect. 

A. — To  be  candid  with  you,  I  do  not  at  all 
wonder  that  such  a  feeling  exists.  If  I  did 
not  know  the  facts  of  the  case  I  should  feel 
very  strongly  on  the  subject  myself.  But 
the  hasty  judgments  that  have  been  formed 
on  this  point  do  a  grievous  wrong  to  the 
Holy  Father.  Take  the  case  even  on  broad, 
general  grounds.  The  notion  that  the  Pope 


198 


THE       POPE       AND       IRELAND. 


was  in  any  way  influenced  by  political 
considerations  such  as  you  refer  to,  rests 
altogether  upon  the  assumption  that  his 
Holiness  is  in  some  way  opposed  to  the  Irish 
Nationalist  movements — to  the  movement 
for  Home  Rule,  or  to  the  movement  for  ob- 
taining a  full  measure  of  justice  or  of  pro- 
tection against  oppression  for  the  tenant- 
farmers  of  Ireland.  Now  no  asmimftion 
con/tl  be  more  absolutely  ccnirary  to  fact. 

R. — It  is,  I  may  say,  universally  believed, 
your  Grace,  that  many  strong  influences 
of  various  kinds  have  been  brought  to  bear 
upon  his  Holiness  within  the  last  year  or  so, 
to  lead  him  to  take  an  adverse  view  of  the 
Iri.<h  cause. 

A. — People  may  believe  what  they  like, 
but  I  know  what  1  am  talking  about.  It  is 
essential  that  this  point  should  be  fully 
understood  by  the  Irish  people  at  home  and 
abroad  No  matter  what  influences  have 
been  brought  to  bear  upon  the  Holy  Father, 
no  matter  through  what  channels  they  may 
have  worked,  no  matter  how  powerful  they 
may  have  been,  their  work  has  resulted  in 
absolute  failure.  His  Holiness  understands 
the  Irish  question  fully.  He  knows  what  is 
meant  by  the  demand  for  Home  Rule. 
And  he  knows  what  U  meant  by  the  de- 
mand for  a  full  and  effective  measure  of  pro- 
tection against  oppression  and  of  justice  for 
t'.ie  Irish  tenants.  That  is  to  say,  he  knows 
in  the  fullest  detail  what  is  meant  by  these 
de  nands  as  I  understand  them — 

R. — Your  Grace,  it  was  hoped,  would 
have  an  opportunity  of  putting  these  mat- 
ters before  his  Holiness 

A. — I  had  it,  and  I  had  it  in  a  fullness 
which  I  certainly  could  not  have  hoped  for. 
I  need  hardly  add  that  I  availed  myself  to 
the  fullest  possible  extent  of  the  opportun- 
ity that  was  so  graciously  afforded  me 
That,  in  fact,  was  what  kept  me  so  long  in 
Rome  The  Holy  Father  is  now  in  full 
possession  of  the  Irish  national  programme. 
Having  said  so  much  1  need  only  add  that 
nothing  could  be  further  from  hia  thoughts 
than  any  desii  e  to  put  the  slightest  obstacle 
in  the  way  of  its  success  Quite  the  con- 
trary. It  is  the  firm  conviction  of  his  Holi- 
ness that  the  publication  of  the  Decree  of  the 
Holy  Office,  condemning  as  it  does,  those 
points  in  the  practical  working  of  the 
movement  on  which  so  much  hostile  criti- 
cism was  concentrated,  will  be  the  most  de- 
cided help  in  the  advancement  of  the  Irish 
cause. 

The  following  day  the  Archbishop  of 
Dublin  was  interviewed  by  a  representative 
of  the  Star.  In  the  course  of  the  interview 
his  Grace  said  : 


The  Archbishop  :  If  you  wish  to  know 
my  views  on  the  land  question  I  shall  be 
happy  to  give  them  to  you. 

R. — The  agitation  to  which  the  Rescript 
has  given  rise  turns  mainly  upon  the  state- 
ment made  about  the  land  question  in  that 
document  The  Irish  people  have  been  as- 
sured by  your  Grace  in  the  first  instance, 
and  afterwards  by  the  recent  meeting  of  the 
Irish  Bishops,  that  the  Roman  Decree  is  a 
decision  in  morals  and  not  a  political  act. 
But  it  lays  down  a  number  of  statements 
that  certainly  amount  to  the  condemnation 
of  the  present  land  movement  from  be- 
ginning to  end. 

A.  — No  ;  excuse  me,  nothing  of  the  kind. 

R. — Does  it  not  practically  define  that  the 
Irish  tenants  have  no  longer  any  cause  for 
complaint  ?  It  says,  equivalently  at  least, 
th*t  the  rent  question  is  now  settled  ;  that 
the  tenants  are  under  an  obligation  of  jus- 
tice to  pay  their  rents  ;  or  th  .t  at  all  events 
there  are  tribunals  in  existence  to  do  them 
full  justice  if  they  think  their  rents  too 
high.  It  is  hard  to  know  what  it  is,  if  it  is 
not  a  sweeping  condemnation  of  the  Irish 
Land  movement  in  every  shape  and  form. 

A  — But  you  may  t*ke  it  on  my  authority 
that  there  is  no  such  condemnation.  I  can- 
not deny  that  statements  such  as  you  have 
quoted  are  to  be  found  in  the  Letter  that 
accompanies  the  Decree.  But  the  Decree 
itself  approved  as  it  is  by  the  Pope,  is  one 
thing  ;  that  Letter  is  another. 

R.— That  is  the  Letter  of  Cardinal 
Monaco  ? 

A.  — Yes.  There  has  been  a  great  deal  of 
foolish  writing  on  this  subject  in  some  of 
the  newspapers.  It  is  all  very  irritating  to 
our  people,  and  I  have  no  doubt  that  a  great 
deal  of  it  was  meant  to  be  so.  The  Decrea 
itself,  as  a  decision  in  morals,  is  binding  on 
consciences  of  Catholics.  As  to  Cardi- 
nal Monaco's  Letter,  it  is  to  be  treated  of 
course,  with  respect;  but  it  has  no  binding 
force  whatever.  It  is  not  intended,  and  in- 
deed, it  could  not  have  been  intended  to 
have  any. 

The  lucid  explanation  which  the  eminent 
Archbishop  of  Dublin  gives  concerning  the 
Propaganda  Circular  makes  it  entirely  un- 
necessary for  us  to  say  any  more  on  the 
subject,  save  to  p'ace  on  record  the  fact  that 
Pope  Leo  XIII.,  is  entirely  exculpated 
from  all  the  calumnies  cast  upon  his  charac- 
ter by  demagogues  and  doubtful  Catholics 
whose  malice  has  led  them  into  taking  sides 
with  the  enemies  of  both  Ireland  and  the 
Pope. 


THE      POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


199 


CHAPTER      XXXV. 

Some  Vicious  Falsehoods  Regarding  "Vatican  Politics"  fully  Refuted  —The  "Italian 
Ring"  Accounted  for. — The  Characters  of  Pope  Alexander  VI.,  and  other 
Pontiffs  Triumphantly  Vindicated. — Conclusion. 


There  is  no  body  of  representatives  that 
have  ever  existed  in  the  world  who  have 
been  more  caustically  calumniated,  or  more 
constantly  maligned,  than  the  Popes  of 
Rome— the  Vicars  of  Christ,  the  Vicegerents 
of  God.  Catholics  may  wonder  why  this  is 
so,  since  so  large  a  majority  of  them  were 
pious,  pure  and  prudent,  wise  beyond  their 
generation,  and  directed  in  their  office  by 
Divine  Wisdom  Itself. 

The  Popes  are  in  the  world  but  not  of  it, 
and,  representing  as  they  do  in  their  ca- 
pacity as  Chief  Bishops  of  the  one  holy 
Roman  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  of 
Chribt,  that  they  should  be  hated  and 
slandered  by  the  world  is  precisely  what  the 
Son  of  God  predicted  concerning  all  who 
take  up  their  cross  and  follow  Him.  The 
servant  cannot  be  greater  than  the  Master, 
and  as  our  Blessed  Redeemer  was  ha  ed  and 
reviled  whilst  on  earth  for  man's  Redemp- 
tion, so  also  were  his  chief  servants,  the 
Popes  of  Rome,  reviled  from  the  first  to 
the  nineteenth  century.  In  a  word,  to  that 
glorious  body  of  saintly  men  may  well  be 
applied  the  words  of  our  Lord  to  His 
disciples  : 

"Blessed  shall  you  be  when  men  shall  hate 
you,  and  when  they  shall  separate  you.  and  cast 
out  your  name  aa  evil  for  the  Son  of  Man's  sake. 
Be  glad  in  that  day  and  rejoice  ;  for  behold, 
your  reward  is  great  in  Heaven.  For  according 
to  these  things  did  their  fathers  to  the  Prophets." 

The  author  of  the  work  under  review  ex- 
presses great  anxiety  in  his  last  chapter 
that  his  readers  should  have  "  a  general 
knowledge  of  the  character  (religious  and 
political)  of  the  Papal  office  and  of  the 
personnel  of  its  incumbents  at  various 
periods,  and  also  a  knowledge  of  the  origin, 
characteristics  and  personnel  of  the  College 
of  Cardinals,"  and  then  follows  several 
pages  of  some  of  the  most  vicious  and 
vituperative  falsehoods  that  ever  were 


framed  by  apostates,  animated  by  the  spirit 
of  diabolical  hatred  against  Almighty  God, 
His  Church  and  His  Vicars.  Such  slan- 
derous and  malignant  misrepresentations 
are  calculated  to  exert  a  most  baneful  influ- 
ence in  the  world  if  they  are  penni  ted  to 
exist  without  refutation,  hence  we  add  a 
chapter  to  our  work  in  order  to  show  the 
slanderous  nature  of  this  author's  vile  repe- 
tition of  his  anti  Christian  precursors  in  the 
evil  work  of  slandering  the  Bride  of  Christ 
and  her  chief  Bishops. 

The  apostate  antagonist  whose  work  we 
are  reviewing  seems  to  be  greatly  disturbed 
in  his  mind  through  fear  that  the  Pope  and 
the  Cardinals,  who  constitute  the  executive 
organization  of  the  Catholic  Church,  will 
commit  some  overt  act  which  will  lead  to 
disasterous  consequences,  but  inasmuch  as 
the  writer  in  question  has  publicly  placed 
himself  outside  the  pale  of  the  Church  by 
his  open  apostacy,  we  fail  to  see  why  he  is 
so  perturbed  on  this  subject,  save  that  he 
desires  to  arouse  suspicion  in  the  minds  of 
Catholics  so  as  to  change  their  reverence 
for  their  Church  into  a  hatred  as  intense  as 
that  so  manifestly  and  malignantly  evinced 
in  his  bad  book. 

The  next  complaint  made  is  based  upon 
this  statement : 

"The  College  of  Cardinals  for  over  eight  hun- 
dred years  (ever  since  it  was  created)  has  been 
composed  almost  exclusively  of  Italians,  and 
these  hare  been  nearly  all  members  of  a 
little  Italian  nobility  consisting  of  a  very  few 
families." 

For  the  information  of  our  readers  it 
may  be  well  to  meet  this  objection  by  giving 
the  reasons  why  a  large  majority  of  the 
members  of  the  College  of  Cardinals  are 
Italians,  which  is  simply  a  condition  that  is 
enforced  by  reason  of  the  fact  that  all  the 
business  transacted  by  the  Church  is  carried 
on  in  Rome.  It  will  be  easily  understood, 


200 


THK       POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


therefore,  that  in  carrying  on  the  vast 
amount  of  ecclesiastical  business  transacted 
for  the  Bishops,  Priosts  and  laity  all  over 
the  world  it  is  most  necessary  that  the  Car- 
dinals should  reside  in  the  immediate 
vicinity  of  the  Holy  Father  so  as  to  receive 
his  instructions  speedily  and  easily. 

Rome  is  the  centre  and  capital  of  the 
Catholic  Church.  Here  are  received'all  ec' 
clesiastical  and  diplomatic  documents  from 
every  portion  of  the  civilized  globe,  and  if 
the  Pope  had  to  wait  until  Cardinals  could 
be  sent  for  from  different  portions  of 
the  Christian  world  in  order  to  transact 
the  business  detailed  in  such  documents, 
the  wheels  of  the  Church  would  be  clogged 
and  nothing  but  delay,  disorder  and  disap- 
pointment would  ensue. 

Under  the  system  of  having  Italian 
Cardinals  who  reside  in  Rome,  the  mul- 
tifarious duties  of  the  different  Congrega- 
tions are  attended  to  promptly,  and  the  vast 
concerns  of  the  Church  run  along  smoothly 
and  successfully.  It  must  also  be  borne  in 
mind  that  men  are  not  born  Cardinals. 
The  training  necessary  to  understand  fully 
the  particular  and  peculiar  methods  em 
ployed  by  the  Holy  See  in  its  adminis- 
tration of  the  different  duties  entailed  upon 
the  Vicar  of  Christ,  as  well  as  upon  the 
members  of  the  different  Congregations, 
can  only  be  acquired  by  a  long  residence  as 
well  as  by  close  and  constant  study  and 
training  in  the  Eternal  City. 

It  now  remains  for  us  only  to  show  why 
so  many  Cardinals  are  members  of  "  a  little 
Italian  nobility,''  and  that  is  very  easily  ac- 
complished. Cardinals  residing  in  Rome 
receive  only  a  small  stipend  which  is  not 
nearly  sufficient  to  meet  their  expenses. 
Roman  Cardinals  are  compelled  to  keep  up 
a  certain  amount  of  dignity  which  those  in 
other  countries  are  exempt  from.  A  Roman 
Cardinal  must  have  a  certain  number  of 
servants,  his  own  horses  and  carriage,  and 
all  the  other  appurtenances  of  his  high  office, 
and  it  is  only  the  members  of  that  '•  little 
Italian  nobility,"  so  sneeringly  and  scur- 
riously  alluded  to,  that  are  able  to  furnish 
the  means  to  keep  up  the  expenses  entailed 
on  Cardinals  resident  in  Rome,  in  order, 
therefore,  to  sustain  the  dignity  of  their 


high  ecclesiastical  position,  and  to  be  able 
to  contribute  the  alms  which  they  are  con- 
stantly interceded  for,  Italian  candidates  for 
the  purple  have  to  be  either  wealthy  in 
their  own  right,  or  else  members  of  families 
whose  position  in  life  is  such  that  they  are 
able  to  assist  their  relatives  with  a  share  of 
their  riches. 

Such  is  the  reason  why  Italian  Cardinals 
happen  in  many  cases  to  be  members  of 
"a  little  Italian  nobility,"  and  it  is  the 
same  "little  Italian  nobility,"  by  the  way 
which  has  given  to  the  Church  some  of 
the  greatest  Saints,  Popes,  Cardinals  and 
Bishops  that  ever  lived  beneath  the  shadow 
of  St.  Peter's.  Thus  it  would  seem  as  if 
Almighty  God  had  raised  up  this  "  little 
Italian  nobility"  around  the  Pontifical 
Chair  for  His  own  wise  ends,  for  His  own 
greater  honor  and  glory,  as  well  as  for  the 
benefit  of  the  whole  Church. 

Malignant-minded  writers  who  thus  wan- 
tonly sneer  at  ''the  little  Italian  nobility"  in 
Rome,  and  who  allude  to  the  fact  that  some 
of  the  Popes  were  blood  relations  as  some- 
thing that  is  dishonorable  to  the  Papacy 
and  inj  urious  to  the  Church,  evidently  for- 
get that  in  selecting  St.  John  the  Baptist 
as  His  precursor,  and  also  in  gathering 
around  Himself  the  twelve  Apostles 
who  were  to  propagate  His  truths,  our 
Blessed  Redeemer  had  among  all  of  these 
first  Christians  many  men  who  were 
related  by  consanguinity  not  only  to  Him- 
self but  also  to  each  other.  Thus  St. 
John  the  Baptist  was  a  relative  of  our  Di- 
vine Lord  ;  St.  James  the  Greater  was  a 
brother  of  St.  John  the  Evangelist  and  also 
related  to  our  Blessed  Redeemer  ;  St.  James 
the  Less  was  called  the  brother  of  our  Lord, 
and  St.  Andrew  was  the  brother  of  St. 
Peter.  Here,  therefore,  we  have  the  first 
"colony"  of  Christians  formed  by  the  Son 
of  God  Himself,  and  therein  we  find  a  most 
excellent  precedent  for  "  the  little  Italian 
nobility  consisting  of  a  very  few  families." 
The  Church  of  God  was  founded  by  "  a  very 
few  families,"  yet  it  was  the  All  wise,  Om- 
nipotent and  Omnipresent  Creator  of  all 
things  Who  thus  founded  it.  And  all 
praise,  glory  and  adoration  to  Him  for 
having  done  so  ! 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


201 


A   VINDICATION  OF  THE    CHARACTER   OK   POPE 
ALEXANDER   VI.     AND    OTHER    PONTIFFS. 


As  an  example  of  the  "consuming  am- 
bition and  burning  jealousies"  which  marred 
the  lives  of  the  members  of  "  the  little 
Italian  nobility,"  our  author  cites  the  case 
of  Pope  Alexander  VI.,  whom  he  styles 
"  an  exceptionally  unworthy  Pope,"  merely 
because  he  found  some  enemy  of  that  Pon- 
tiff who  had  calumniated  his  character. 

It  is  the  misfortune  of  the  Catholic 
Church  that  Protestant  calumniators  of  the 
Popes  have  been  allowed  to  fill  the  ears  of 
mankind  in  general  with  their  slanders 
against  the  characters  of  many  Pontiffs, 
whilst  Catholic  writers  remained  listlessly 
looking  on  and  seemingly  helpless  to  stay 
the  assaults  of  the  common  enemy.  For  this 
reason  even  Catholics  themselves  have  come 
to  look  upon  Popes  like  Alexander  VI., 
with  feelings  of  horror,  and  to  wonder  how 
such  "  monsters  of  iniquity"  could  be  per- 
mitted by  Almighty  God  to  reign  over  His 
Church.  In  this  way  the  demon  of  detrac- 
tion has  dinned  into  the  ears  of  the  world 
all  the  fallacious  fables,  malicious  inven- 
tions, and  diabolical  falsehoods  which  an- 
c  ent  and  modern  enemies  of  the  Church 
have  thrown  upon  the  surface  of  the  stream 
of  anti- Catholic  literature  since  printing  was 
invented.  By  this  means  cowardice  has  been 
engendered  in  the  minds  of  many  Catholics 
who,  in  their  timidity,  imagine  that  no  de- 
fence whatever  can  be  made  against  such 
assaults  upon  the  characters  of  Pontiffs  like 
Alexander  VI.,  who  is  ranked,  seemingly 
by  general  consent,  as  "  the  worst  among 
bad  Popes." 

It  is  no  discredit  to  us  to  admit  that 
thirty  years  ago  we  were  among  those  who 
believed  in  the  commonly- reported  iniqui- 
ties attributed  to  the  Pontiff  whose  defence 
we  have  undertaken.  But  when  we  had 
devoted  much  time  to  reading,  we  began  to 
discover  that  there  were  positive  reasons 
which  impelled  certain  individuals  who 
lived  contemporaneous  with  Pope  Alexander 
VI.,  to  blacken  his  character.  These  slan- 
ders were  carried  down  the  stream  of  time, 
being  increased  in  iniquity  and  augmented 
in  number  by  Protestant  and  infidel  writers 
who  desired  to  "make  bad  worse"  for  the 


reason  that  every  pang  they  inflicted  upon 
the  Catholic  Church  was  calculated  to  lessen 
her  influence  in  the  world  by  undermining 
the  earthly  corner-stone  of  the  entire  fabric. 

One  cause  why  the  character  of  Pope 
Alexander  VI.,  has  been  assailed  with  such 
virulence  may  be  traced  to  the  fact  that  in 
the  period  of  his  existence  a  great  degree  of 
rivalry  and  animosity  existed  between  some 
of  the  leading  Italian  families,  each  of 
which  had  literary  hangers-on  who  were 
prepared  to  blacken  the  character  of  Pope, 
Prince  or  Bishop  in  order  to  satisfy  the 
jealousy  and  spleen  of  those  who  hired 
them,  as  well  as  to  replenish  their  fortunes 
by  means  of  such  malignant  attacks  upon 
innocent  people — who  thus  became  the  vic- 
tims of  hatred  inspired  by  misrepresenta- 
tion. 

An  idea  of  the  state  of  Italy  at  the  time 
when  Pope  Alexander  was  called  upon  to 
rule  the  Church  may  be  gleaned  from  the 
fact  that  between  the  last  illness  of  Pope 
Innocent  VIII. ,  and  the  coronation  of  his 
successor,  Alexander  VI.  — a  period  of  less 
than  two  months— there  were  more  than 
two  hundred  unpunished  assassinations  com- 
mitted in  the  Ecclesiastical  States  alone. 
Among  the  first  acts  of  the  new  Pontiff 
was  the  appointment  of  four  Commissioners 
to  inquire  into  these  horrible  crimes,  whilst 
Alexander  himself  had  to  devote  one  day 
each  week  to  hearing  the  complaints  of  the 
families  of  the  victims.  And  this  arduous 
and  disagreeable  duty  he  did  with  such 
equal  and  exact  justice  to  all  that  he  gave 
great  public  satisfaction.* 

The  State  of  contention  between  the 
prominent  families  which  made  up  the 
Italian  nobility  of  the  fifteenth  century, 
may  well  be  compared,  in  its  scandalous  in- 
tensity, to  the  attitudes  assumed  by  the  dif- 
ferent political  factions  in  this  country  about 
the  time  when  a  presidential  election  is  ap- 
proaching. A  person  who  could  con  over 
the  contents  of  the  American  political  press 
a  hundred  years  from  now  would  form  the 
opinion  that  both  President  Harrison  and 
ex-President  Cleveland  were  men  who  did 
not  possess  a  single  virtue  to  entitle  them  to 
hold  for  a  day  the  exalted  position  of 

*Da  Montor's  Lives  and  Times  of  the  Roman 
Pontiffs,  Vol.  I.  p.  634. 


202 


THK      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


President  of  thU  great  Republic.  The 
partisan  press  of  each  political  organization 
so  blackens  the  characters  of  opposing  can- 
didates that  the  reader  of  the  future  will 
wonder  how  the  Union  continued  to  exist 
when  certain  men  were  called  upon  to  take 
the  first  positions  in  its  government.  And, 
in  like  manner,  the  writers  of  the  fifteenth 
century  blackened  the  character  of  Pope 
Alexander  VI.  through  a  spirit  cf  spleen 
and  jealousy  which  cauaed  them  to  love 
falsehood  better  than  truth. 

During  the  present  century,  however,  a 
great  flood  of  light  has  been  thrown  upon 
the  character  of  Alexander  VI.,  redeem- 
ing it  from  the  huge  mass  of  filth  cast 
upon  it  by  Guicciardini,  Burchardt,  Jove, 
Tomasi,  Machiavelli,  Voltaire  and  the 
school  of  slanderers  who  have  studiously 
followed  that  arch  enemy  of  Christianity 
with  a  fidelity  worthy  of  a  better  cause. 
Nearly  all  the  calumnies  heaped  upon  this 
Pontiffs  memory  have  been  proved  unjust  as 
well  as  undeserved,  and  although  Roderico 
Borgia,  when  a  your.g  man,  may  have  been 
addicted  to  some  licentious  habits,  yet,  as 
Pontiff,  his  character  is  free  from  all  carnal 
corruption.  In  a  word  Pope  Alexander  has 
been  made  the  scape-goat  of  the  scandal- 
mongers of  the  fifteenth  century. 

Now  let  us  glance  at  the  character  of  the 
men  through  whose  malignant  animosity  the 
character  of  Pope  Alexander  VI.  has  been 
designedly  defamed.  Let  us  ascertain  by 
contemporaneous  fact  and  subsequent  evi- 
dence whether  they  are  entitled  to  credit 
for  the  slanderous  charges  which  emanated 
from  their  malignant  imaginations,  and 
when  once  we  have  revealed  the  vilenesa 
of  the  traducers  of  this  Pontiff,  the  pleasing 
discovery  will  be  made  that  they  are  entire- 
ly unworthy  of  any  recognition  whatever  as 
the  accusers  of  a  Pope  whose  good  name 
they  have  buried  for  nearly  four  hundred 
years  beneath  the  debris  of  diabolical  de- 
traction. Here  are  the  principal  pensioned 
or  prejudiced  witnesses  against  Pope  Alex- 
ander VI.  : 

The  first  writer  whose  wicked  inventions 
and  innuendos  have  helped  to  sully  the 
character  of  the  Pontiff  whose  case  we  are 
considering,  is  the  Florentine,  Machiavelli, 


who  was  a  prototype  of  the  notoriously  vile 
Giraldus  Cambrensis — a  man  whose  evi- 
dence no  person  acquainted  with  his  char- 
acter for  falsehood  would  accept.  A  pen- 
sioned writer  who  purposely  poisoned  his 
pages  with  putrid  charges  against  the  Pope 
in  question,  for  no  higher  motive  than  that 
which  impels  a  hired  assassin  to  remorse- 
lessly stab  his  innocent  victim  to  death. 
Like  Cambrensis,  the  hireling  of  King 
Henry  II.  of  England,  Machiavelli  was  a 
noted  traducer,  whose  libelous  pen  was  ever 
ready  to  puncture  and  poison  the  characters 
of  those  whom  he  was  paid  to  revile  and 
to  bring  into  disgrace. 

Guicciardini  was  only  twenty  years  old 
when  Pope  Alexander  died,  hence  his  accu- 
sations were  merely  copies  of  the  calumnies 
of  his  purchased  predecessors.  Speaking  of 
the  bad  faith  of  this  foe  of  the  Pontiff  the 
infidel  Bayle  in  his  Dictionnaire  Phil- 
osophi<fue,  says:  "Guicciardini  deserves 
to  be  reprobated  ;  he  is  guilty  of  the  fault 
of  all  scandal  mongers,"  and  even  Voltaire 
accuses  this  hireling  of  imposture.  So  vile 
was  his  History  of  Italy  that  when  Guicciar- 
dini was  on  his  death  bed  he  requested  that 
it  be  burned — a  fate  that  might  justly  have 
been  applied  to  many  other  fifteenth  cen- 
tury documents  which  descanted  unjustly 
upon  the  character  of  Pope  Alexander  VI. 
Paul  Jove,  another  traducer  of  this  Pon- 
tiff, is  described  as  "a  venal  and  untruth- 
ful writer,"  one  who  boasted  that  he  wielded 
two  pens— one  of  gold,  the  other  of  iron — 
to  write  of  princes  according  to  the  favors 
or  frowns  he  received  from  them  !  He  was 
also  noted  as  one  who  "mercilessly  defamed 
those  who  would  not  pay  him  for  his  false- 
hoods." In  this  age  such  a  character  would 
be  called  a  professional  blackmailer  ! 

Tomasi  was  paid  his  price  for  his  per- 
fidious slanders  by  the  enemies  of  the  tra- 
duced Pontiff.  He  theieby  became  un- 
worthy of  credence  or  respect.  Such  at 
least  is  the  opinion  adduced  by  Autoine 
Varrilas  in  his  work  on  Louis  XII. 

We  now  come  to  the  Diarium  of  John 
Burchardt.  This  book  is  the  chief  store- 
house from  which  modern  enemies  of  the 
Church  draw  their  supply  of  slanders  against 
Pope  Alexander  VI.  which,  they  inject  into 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


203 


the  current  literature  of  the  century. 
During  his  whole  life  Burchardt  was 
altogether  unknown  to  literary  fame.  Not 
a  single  evidence  of  his  mental  labors 
existed  in  the  world  when  he  died.  But 
nearly  tivo  hundred  years  after  his  death,  a 
French  Calvinist  claimed  to  have  discovered 
what  is  now  known  as  the  Diarium  or  docu- 
ment of  detraction  against  the  character  of 
Pope  Alexander  VI.  The  documents  which 
this  bitter  enemy  of  the  Church  said  he  dis- 
covered, consisted  of  a  motley  group  of  de- 
tached leaves,  some  of  them  written  in 
Latin,  others  in  French,  and  others  again  in 
Italian.  These  unauthenticated  documents, 
so  suspiciously  found  nearly  two  hundred 
years  after  the  death  of  Burchardt,  were 
presented  to  Leibnitz,  who  gave  them  to 
the  world  as  genuine  copies  of  some  original 
documents  which  he  regretted  "he  had  not 
been  able  to  become  possessed  of.  Such  is 
the  slender  and  very  suspicious  thread  upon 
which  the  traductions  of  the  Diarium  are 
strung. 

Here  we  have  a  vile  work  attributed  to 
a  man  who  was  not  known  to  have  ever  put 
a  single  thought  on  paper  during  his  whole 
life.  Two  centuries  elapse  after  his  death 
when  a  bitter  Protestant  produces  some  odd 
leaves  of  manuscript,  he  passes  them  to  an- 
other^Protea  ant,  and  he — glad  to  gather  in 
any  literary  garbage  that  would  defile  the 
Catholic  Church — prints  them  as  the  diary 
of  a  man  dead  two  hundred  years  and  en- 
tirely unknown  in  the  literary  world  ! 
These  circumstances  are  well  calculated  to 
excite  suspicion.  But  to  make  matters 
worse — to  make  "  confusion  worse  con- 
founded"— other  Protestant  individuals  be- 
gan to  discover  other  detracting  documents 
which  they,  too,  considered  as  versions  of 
Burchardt's  Diarium,  and  out  of  this 
medley  of  manuscript  has  been  hatched 
many  of  the  vilest  calumnies  which  hitherto 
have  blackened  the  character  of  Pope  Alex- 
ander VI.  in  the  eyes  of  both  Catholics  and 
Protestants  alike. 

Let  us  ask,  therefore,  every  impartial 
reader,  if  the  character  of  one  of  the  ablest 
successors  of  St.  Peter  is  to  be  weighed  and 
found  wanting  by  the  unjust  weights  of  such 
wicked  inventions  ?  The  calumnies  are  con- 
tained in  a  book  supposed  to  be  written  by 


a  man  who  was  never  known  as  an  author. 
The  manuscripts  are  fathered  by  French  Cal- 
vinists — the  most  bitter  and  unscrupulous 
enemies  the  Church  encountered  in  modern 
ages.  The  uispicious  documents  are  sud- 
denly brought  to  light  when  two  centuries 
had  rolled  over  the  tomb  of  their  reputed 
author.  Do  not  our  readers  see  the  evi- 
dences of  fraud,  fanaticism  and  forgery  in 
these  documents  j  ust  as  plainly  as  we  have 
pointed  them  out  in  the  Adrian  and  Alex- 
ander Bulls  of  a  few  centuries  previous? 

Now  let  us  turn  away  from  these  sus- 
picious documents  and  glean  from  the  pages 
of  respectable  writers  the  opinions  they 
held  concerning  the  vile  fragments  which 
are  supposed  to  make  up  the  volumes  at- 
tributed to  John  Burchardt.  Paris  de 
Grassis,  a  Canon  of  Bologna  and  subsequent- 
ly Bishop  of  Pesaro,  speaking  of  the  vile 
rubbish  said  to  have  been  composed  by 
Burchardt  says  :  "  Not  only  was  he  no  man 
but  he  was  in  reality  the  most  detestable  of 
beasts ;  besides,  he  was  very  wicked  and 
spiteful.  He  has  written  books  which  no- 
body can  understand  unless  it  be  a  sibyl 
or  the  devil,  who  must  have  been  his  ac- 
complice."* 

Such  is  the  character  of  the  man  who  is 
made  to  appear  on  the  witness  stand  of  the 
world  to  swear  against  the  character  of  Pope 
Alexander  VI.  What  think  you  of  him  ? 
A  fiend  with  the  Father  of  Lies  to  help 
him,  could  invent  any  calumny  short  of  con- 
victing the  Son  of  God  of  error,  and  it  is 
upon  such  Satan-inspired  testimony  that 
the  world  has  uttered  its  condemnation  of 
Pope  Alexander  VI. 

The  base  interpolator  who  added  the 
forty-second  chapter  to  the  Mttalogicns 
of  John  of  Salsbury  made  that  Prelate  eat, 
drink  and  all  but  sleep  with  Pope  Adrian 
IV.,  during  his  sojourn  in  Rome.  In  like 
manner  the  conspirators  against  truth  who 
concocted  the  loose  leaves  attributed  to 
Burchardt  after  he  had  slumbered  for  two 
hundred  years  in  the  silent  tomb,  make  his 
familiarity  with  the  Pontiff  of  his  day,  fully 
on  a  par — both  in  fraud  and  fiction — with 
that  of  the  vile  inventor  of  the  forty-  second 
chapter  of  the  Metalogicus.  Here  is  what 

*Diario  ad  annum  1506. 


204 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


Paris  de  Grasais  says  on  this  point  : 

In  reading  him  one  would  think  he  never 
quitted  the  Pope  for  a  dingle  instant,  lie  fol 
lows  him  to  the  chapel,  to  the  consUtory,  to 
table,  to  bed ;  night  has  no  darkness,  the 
obscurity  of  w  hich  he  cannot  penetrate.  lie  is 
a  person  who  does  not  believe  in  the  existence 
of  virtue,  and  who  by  the  omnipotence  of  a 
ducat  would  ordinarily  explain  many  a  good 
thought  or  a  good  action.  Never  did  a  romancer 
with  a  naivete  so  comical  sport  with  the  cre- 
dulity of  his  readers.  Of  Alexander  VI..  who 
according  to  him  was  dissimulation  itself  per* 
sonified,  he  makes  the  chief  personage  of  a 
melodrama  who  publishes  his  own  dissoluteness 
to  the  whole  Roman  people.  Only  let  a  Cardi- 
nal die  and  forthwith  he  examines  the  drink  of 
the  deceased,  and  almost  always  finds  in  it  seme 
traces  of  poisoning.  What  was  the  object  of 
this  poisoning?  It  was  because  Alexander 
wished  to  possess  himself  of  the  riches  of  the 
Cardinal.  Voltaire,  as  a  tragic  poet,  has  biting- 
ly  jeered  at  this  gross  violation  of  the  first  rules 
of  the  dramatic  art.  "  It  has  been  pretended,'' 
says  he,  "  that  in  a  pressing  need  for  money 
Alexander  desired  to  succeed  to  the  estates  of 
some  Cardinals,  but  it  is  certain  that  Caesar 
Borgia  took  away  a  hundred  ducats  of  gold  of 
the  treasure  of  his  father.  The  need  for  money, 
then,  was  not  so  real.  Besides,  how  was  it 
possible  to  be  mistaken  about  that  bottle  of 
poisoned  wine  which  it  is  said  caused  the  death 
of  the  Pope  ?  If,  when  the  Pope  died,  granting 
that  he  was  poisoned,  the  cause  of  his  death  had 
been  kuown,  it  certainly  would  have  been  known 
by  the  very  persons  whom  it  was  intended  to 
poison  ;  they  would  not  have  left  such  a  crime 
unpunished,  nor  would  they  have  suffered  Caesar 
Borgia  to  obtain  peaceable  possession  of  his 
father's  treasure.  ...  It  is  not  difficult  to 
invent  falsehoods  when  persons  are  determined 
to  calumniate." 

Leaving  the  traducers  of  Pope  Alexander 
VI.  to  rest  in  their  own  infamy,  let  us  now 
turn  our  attention  to  the  life  led  by  that 
Pontiff,  and  discover,  if  we  can,  a  clue  to  the 
"infamous  deeds"  which  have  made  this 
great  Pontiff  the  cynosure  of  all  Christian 
eyes — as  the  vilest  character  that  ever  in- 
habited the  Eternal  City. 

Roderico  Borgia,  who  subsequently  became 
Pope  Alexander  VI.,  was  born  at  Valencia 
in  1431.  The  family  of  the  Borgia  has  been 
so  maliciously  represented  by  Protestant 
and  infidel  writers  that  visions  of  the  bloody 
dagger,  the  poisoned  cup,  and  the  midnight 
carousal  will  doubtless  arise  in  the  minds  of 
many  of  our  readers.  And  yet,  from  this 


same  family  whose  name  is  covered  with  a 
coating  of  iniquity  by  the  enemies  of  the 
Church,  sprang  two  notable  Pontiffs  — 
Calixtus  III.  and  Alexander  II.,  as  well  as 
a  great  saint — the  lovable  Francis  Borgia, 
one  of  the  Generals  of  the  Society  of  Jesus. 

After  acquiring  a  most  thorough  educa- 
tion, Roderico  Borgia  adopted  the  profession 
of  law,  but  he  soon  gave  that  up  for  the 
military  camp,  in  search  of  glory  by  feats  of 
arms.  Here  he  remained  until  his  uncle, 
Alphonsus  Borgia,  was  elected  Pope  under 
the  title  of  Calixtus  III.,  when  he  was  called 
to  Rome  and  placed  in  a  position  of  trust 
near  that  Pontiff.  He  fulfilled  his  duties  so 
well  that  he  was  subsequently  elevated  to 
the  purple,  although  he  was  then  but 
twenty-five  years  old. 

As  yet  Roderico  Borgia  had  not  received 
Holy  Orders,  nor  was  his  case  an  excep- 
tional one,  as  there  are  several  instances  in 
former  centuries  where  laymen  became 
Cardinals,  although  the  modern  custom  is 
that  a  secular  on  becoming  a  Cardinal  shall 
receive  Sub-Deaconship  at  least. 

The  enemies  of  Pope  Calixtus  III  claim 
that  his  nephew  led  a  most  disreputable  life 
and  that  he  was  the  father  of  several  illegi- 
timate children.  Well,  even  admitting  for 
argument  sake  that  these  occurrences  were 
true,  the  fact  nevertheless  remains,  that 
all  these  children  were  born  fully  tuenty  years 
before  he  took  Hvly  Orders,  uhich  he  did  not 
enter  until  1^7S,  when  Pope  Sixtvs  IF., 
nominated  him  Bithop  of  Alba.  Fourteen 
years  later— August  llth  1492— Cardinal 
Roderico  Borgia  (Lenzuoli)  was  called  to 
the  Chair  of  Peter — and  from  the  first  hour 
of  his  Pontificate  to  the  last  day  of  his 
reign — August  18th,  1503 — not  a  single 
stone  can  be  cast  at  him  as  a  transgressor 
against  the  virtue  of  continence. 

The  Son  of  God  came  into  the  world  to 
save  sinners.  Thus  he  changed  the  perse- 
cutor Saul  into  the  personification  of  a  most 
courageous  Christian  martyr.  In  like  man- 
ner Augustine— the  sorrow  and  the  joy  of  St. 
Monica — became  one  of  the  bright  particu- 
lar stars  of  the  Church  of  that  God  Whom 
he  spurned  and  scorned  in  his  youth. 
When  we  reflect  on  these  examples  of  God's 
mercy  towards  men  whom  even  the  world 


THK      POPE      AND      IRKLAtfD. 


205 


called  wicked,  we  will  cease  to  wonder  that 
one  who  was  afterwards  Pope  had  children 
by  Julia  Farnese,  who  was,  beyond  doubt, 
legally  married  to  the  Cavalier  Roderico 
Borgia. 

Julia  Farnese  came  from  a  family  as 
notable  as  even  the  exalted  Borgias,  and 
those  writers  <vho  propagate  the  idea  that 
such  a  high-born  lady  would  loosely  consort 
with  one  of  the  other  sex,  know  very  little 
indeed  of  the  rigorous  Christian  chivalry 
which  was  one  of  the  main  characteristics 
of  the  Italian  nobility  of  past  centuries,  and 
which  is  proudly  maintained  up  to  our  own 
times. 

The  intimate  relations  which  existed  be- 
tween the  Borgia  and  the  Farnese   families 
is  the  best  proof  that  the  chi'dren  of  Julia 
Farnese   were   born   in  honorable  wedlock. 
Cardinal  Farnese   (who  afterwards  became 
Pope   Paul  III.)  was  a  great  favorite  with, 
and  a  trusted  representative  of,  Pope  Alex- 
ander VI.     Angelus  Ferdinand  Farnese  fell 
whilst  fighting   under   the   banner  of  Ccesar 
Borgia.      Is  it  at  all  likely,  therefore,  that 
if  any   criminal   contumely  had  been  cast 
upon  the  character   of  Julia  Farnese,  that 
her  kindred  would  have  served  the  interests 
of   the   family    who   had  brought  disgrace 
upon  the  unsullied  escutcheon  of  her  honor- 
able family  ?      It  is  certain,  therefore,  that 
Roderico  Borgia's  children  were  legitimate, 
and  were  all  born  fully  twenty  years  before 
he  made  his  first  vows  in  the  vocation  of  the 
Priesthood. 

But  it  is  not  by  any  means  certain  that 
Roderico  Borgia  had  any  male  or  female 
offspring.  M  Chantrel*  and  the  author  of 
a  learned  disquisition  on  this  important 
question  in  the  Dublin  Review,  both  con- 
tend that  the  chi  dren  in  question  were 
those  of  the  Pontiff's  brother,  Peter  Louis, 
and  this  fact  was  sworn  to  in  Rome  on  one 
occasion 

Another  learned  writer  on  this  subjectt 
makes  this  important  point,  showing  how 
the  stories  concerning  Roderico  Borgia's 
children  might  have  originated  : 

It    is   well    known    that   in    those   troublous 

*Hiatory  of  the  Popes.     Paris.     1862. 

fj.  J.  Barry,  M.  D.,  in  an  article  in 
American  Catholic  Quarterly  Review  for  April, 
1878. 


times  it  was  the  custom  of  the  Popes  to  choose 
as  a  General  some  one  of  their  relations,  most 
commonly  a  nephew,  possessing  energy  and 
military  talents,  to  defend  the  Pontifical  domains 
against  the  ambitious  and  grasping  princes  that 
surrounded  them,  and  who  continually  sought 
to  invade  them.  It  was  also  the  custom  to  give 
these  relations  the  name  of  suns,  and  such  we 
can  scarcely  doubt  was  the  only  bat>is  upon 
which  the  spirit  of  enmity  supported  its  original 
suspicions  and  calumnies.  And  need  it  be  re- 
marked that  the  terms  son  and  daughter,  and 
their  correlative  one,  father,  are  the  ordinary 
terms  of  address  between  all  ecclesiastics  of  the 
Catholic  Church  and  their  flocks,  and  that  these 
terms  are  understood  in  their  spiritual  sense  ? 

Let  us  now  examine  into  the  behavior  of 
Pope  Alexander  VI.,  after  he  ascended  the 
Pontifical  Throne.  He  was  sixty  years  of 
age  when  he  first  wore  the  Tiara,  and  even 
the  enemies  of  this  much-maligned  martyr 
to  malignant  slanders  are  forced  to  admit 
that  he  was  a  man  of  more  than  ordinary 
prudence  and  whose  appearance  in  public 
betokened  modesty  itself.  He  went  about 
daily  doing  good,  visiting  churches,  hospi- 
tals and  similar  institutions  ;  and  when  not 
thus  engaged  he  was  absorbed  in  affairs  of 
the  Church  which  he  managed  with  mag- 
ticent  skill  and  superexcellent  success. 

In  all  his  actions  throughout  the  eleven 
years  of  his  Pontificate,  Alexander  VI. ,  was 
a  virtuous  and  a  just  Pontiff.  "  Under 
him,  says  the  reputable  AudinJ  "  the  poor 
as  well  as  the  rich  could  obtain  justice  in 
Rome.  The  people,  soldiers  and  citizens 
alike,  testified  great  attachment  to  him, 
even  after  his  death,  because  he  possessed 
qualities  truly  royal.  At  night  he  slept 
scarcely  two  hours,  and  from  the  table  he 
passed  almost  like  a  shadow  without  having 
made  any  stay  there.  Never  did  he  refuse 
listening  to  the  poor;  he  liquidated  the 
debts  of  unfortunate  debtors,  and  he  showed 
himself  without  pity  for  remorseless  pre- 
varicators." 

And  yet  this  is  the  man  whom  the  foul 
tongue  of  calumny  has  consigned  to  the  at- 
tention of  nineteenth-century  Christians  as 
"  a  monster  tf  iniquity  !"  We  would  ask  any 
candid- minded  and  unbiased  reader,  there- 
fore, in  view  of  the  character  of  the  tra- 
ducers  of  Pope  Alexander  VI.,  and  the 

JLife  of  Pope  Leo  X. 


200 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


other  facts  already  asserted  in  his  defence, 
if  there  ia  a  civil  tribunal  in  all  Christen- 
dom that  would  convict  him  of  the  enor- 
mous crimes  charged  against  him  on  the 
evidence  of  such  witnesses  ?  Every  cul- 
prit is  considered  by  Common  Law  to  be 
entitled  to  the  benefit  of  every  doubt  in  his 
case,  and,  we  ask,  shall  the  same  privilege 
be  denied  to  a  Pontiff  whose  career  whilst 
an  occupant  of  the  Chair  of  Peter  was  such 
that  not  a  single  disturbance  on  the  part  of 
the  populace  occurred  in  the  city  of  Rome 
during  the  eleven  years  of  his  Pontificate, 
and  who  was  so  universally  esteemed,  even 
when  first  elected  to  that  highest  ecclesias- 
tical dignity,  that  embassies  were  dispatched 
from  all  the  States  of  Italy  in  order  to 
express  their  unanimous  congratulations. 

Now  let  us  introduce  a  few  witnesses  on 
behalf  of  the  defendant's  side  of  this  case, 
so  as  to  offset  in  some  measure  at  least  the 
popular  prejudice  which  has  long  since  un- 
justly prejudged  the  case  before  us. 
Speaking  of  Pope  Alexander  VI  ,  a  French 
writer,  M  C.  F.  Cheve§  says : 

The  more  attentively  and  thoroughly  the 
original  documents  of  the  history  of  that  period 
are  studied,  the  moie  clear  will  it  become  that 
the  memory  of  Alexander  VI.  has  been  fear- 
fully calumniated.  To  pass  an  unbiased  judg- 
ment up  in  his  life,  it  will  be  especially  necessary 
to  take  into  account  his  social  surroundings. 
True  criticism  has  long  since  cleared  the  name 
of  Alex  ujder  VI.  of  the  charges  of  poisoning 
and  other  horrible  crimes  that  had  been  ground- 
lessly  imputed  to  him  by  the  revengeful  jour- 
nalists of  the  ante-room  and  the  scandal-mongers 
of  that  aze  and  country.  The  implacable  hos- 
tility of  the  Reformers  and  the  resentment  of 
France  because  of  the  political  attitude  of  Alex- 
ander VI.  have  also  contributed  not  a  little  to 
•blacken  his  memory.  It  is  not  our  purpose  to 
excuse  the  irregularities  of  his  life,  but  we  would 
invite  the  reader  desirous  of  learning  to  what 
extent  he  has  been  defamed  to  peruse  the 
chapter  devoted  to  him  by  M.  Audin  (Hist,  de 
L^  in  X.,  T.  L,  c.  2).  He  was  charitable,  ener- 
getic,  fair-minded  and  moderate.  If  he  in- 
curred so  much  ill-will,  it  is  because  he  over- 
came and  kept  in  check  the  feudal  aristocracy  of 
Rome. 

The  Abbe  Darras,  in  his  History  of  the 
Church.\\  thus  sums  up  the  valueless  charac- 

%L>ict  ties  Papes, 

||  Vol.  III.  pp.  635-639-644. 


ter  of  the  numerous  calumnies  circulated  by 
many  hireling  writers  against  the  moral 
character  of  Pope  Alexander  VI. 

The  odious  charges  brought  against  Alexander 
VI.  himself,  in  connection  with  Lucretia,  are 
the  inventions  of  bitter  malice  :  they  have  not 
been  received  by  historians  of  any  weight. 
Their  only  resource  was  the  license  of  romance. 
There  are  pens  which  gather  up  every  item  of 
scandal  from  contemporary  libels,  and  dispense 
them  under  the  pretence  of  contributing  to  the 
moral  education  of  the  public,  while  flooding 
the  world  with  immorality.  We  hold  that  tbeie 
were  two  phases  in  the  life  of  Alexander  VI. : 
the  life  of  the  individual,  which  was,  indeed, 
but  too  much  like  that  of  most  princes  of  his 
day  ;  and  that  of  the  Pope,  which  carried  out, 
on  the  Chair  of  St.  Peter,  the  policy  inaugurated 
by  his  predecessors,  and  preserved  in  its  in- 
tegrity, the  deposit  of  faith  and  of  ecclesiastical 
discipline.  *  *  * 

Many  serious  charges  weigh  upon  the  reputa- 
tion of  Alexander  VI.;  but  no  one  can  accuse 
him  of  weakness  or  defection  in  his  Pontifical 
career.  His  courage  seemed  to  increase  with 
reverses  ;  the  errors  of  his  private  life  never 
affected  his  conduct  as  Popa  ;  and  this  is  the 
highest  lesson  taught  by  the  history  of  his 
Pontificate.  •••••« 

Amid  the  warring  of  men  and  the  din  of  arms, 
the  Pontificate  of  Alexander  VI.  drew  to  a  close. 
"  He  died,"  says  one  of  his  biographers,  "  of  a 
tertian  fever,  after  having  received  the  Sacra- 
ments with  edifying  piety  ;  and  breathed  his 
last  surrounded  by  the  Cardinals."  This  ac- 
count differs  materially  from  that  of  the  ro- 
mances of  the  day,  which  state  that  Alexander 
died  from  the  effects  of  a  poisoned  draught  pre- 
pared for  some  Cardinals,  and  which  was,  by 
mistake,  given  to  the  Pope  at  a  banquet.  His 
death  has  been  as  much  belied  by  calumny  as 
his  life  (A.  i>.  1503).  Alexander's  last  days  were 
devoted  to  a  great  and  noble  enterprise.  He 
had  used  his  most  earnest  endeavors  to  unite 
the  Christian  princes  against  the  Turks  ;  his 
persevering  efforts  only  succeeded  in  obtaining 
help  for  the  Venetians,  who  were  bearing  the 
whole  weight  of  the  war.  Whatever  may  be 
thought  of  Alexander  VI.  as  as  man,  it  must  be 
allowed  that  throughout  the  whole  course  of  his 
administration  he  proved  himself  a  skillful 
diplomatist,  and  did  much  for  the  good  of  Italy 
and  of  the  Church. 

In  view  of  even  the  meagre  amount  of 
evidence  we  have  adduced,  we  claim,  how- 
ever, that  we  have  demonstrated  the  fact 
that  in  his  character  Pope  Alexander  VI. 
was  made  the  victim  of  the  virulent  assaults 


THE      POPE      AND       IRELAND. 


207 


of  hireling  writers  who  had  valuable  reasons 
for  calumniating  him  in  the  blackest  manner 
suggested  by  their  malignant  minds.  We 
have  also  shown  that — even  with  all  his 
faults—  Alexander  VI. ,  as  Pontiff,  left  such 
a  record  behind  him  as  no  man  addicted  to 
the  sensuality  charged  against  him  could 
ever  have  achieved.  Never  for  a  single 
moment  during  the  eleven  years  of  his  Pon- 
tificate, did  this  able  successor  of  St.  Peter 
forget  the  high  and  holy  ecclesiastical 
dignity  of  his  sacred  office  ;  never  did  he 
lose  sight  of  the  duties  which  devolved  upon 
him  as  the  Head  of  Christ's  Church  ;  never 
did  he  permit  even  the  smallest  and  most 
insignificant  compromise  of  either  faith  or 
morals  in  all  the  many  documents  which  he 
has  left  behind  him — and  the  Bullarium  of 
this  great  Pontiff  possesses  remarkable  value. 
It  is  safe,  therefore,  for  Catholics  to  rest 
assured  that  the  calumnies  against  Pope 
Alexander's  character  rest— as  M.  Chantrel 
has  well  remarked — upon  these  events  in 
his  life : 

All  the  accusations  brought  against  him  may 
be  summed  in  the  simple  one,  that  he  employed 
Caesar  Borgia  to  defend  the   political  dominions 
by  force  of  arms  against  Italian  princes  and 
their  foreign  allies.     What  proves  that  such  was 
the  case   is,   undoubtedly,   the  significant  fact 
that  those  who  attack  him  most  do  so  chiefly  on 
account  of  C;e  jar,   and  show  that  they  do  not 
admit,  or  at  least  they  pretend  to  doubt  the 
legitimacy  of  defending  by  force   of  arms  the 
Pontifical  patrimony.      The  accusations  of  im- 
morality recall  those  laid  to  the  charge  of  Boni- 
face VIII.  and  Sixtas  IV.,   and  it  is  easy  to  see 
that  they  come  from  the  envenomed  spirit  of 
party,  and  that  they  are  fully  refuted  by  their 
own  improbability,  their  atrociousness,  and  the 
absence  of  all  impartial  and  disinterested  testi- 
mony.     The  only  things  they  mention  that  can 
be  admitted  without  reserve,   are  those  which 
have  relation  to  the  defence   of  that  patrimony 
by  force  of  arms.     None  of  those  who  acknowl- 
edge or  admit  the  legitimacy  and  propriety  of 
this  defence  attack  Alexander.      If  his    case, 
then,  differs    from  that  of    some    of  his    pre- 
decessors and  successors,  it  is  simply  in  the  de- 
gree of  calumny  with  which  he   has  been  as- 
sailed.     And  yet  it  may  be  doubted  whether  in 
this  respect  there  is  any  difference,  when  one 
pays  attention  to  the  circumstances  of  the  times, 
and  the  great  resentment  which   the  opposition 
of  contemporary   princes  excited    against  that 
Pontiff,  the  history  of   which  has  conseauently 
been  corrupted  in  its  very  source  by   bribed  so- 


called  historians.  When  once  we  give  due 
heed  to  these  circumstances,  we  find  the  case  of 
Alexander  VI.  to  be  no  other  than  that  of  the 
Sixtuses,  the  Juliuses,  the  Bonifaces,  the  Inno- 
cents, and  the  Gregories  of  the  glorious  Ponti- 
fical line. 

The  enemies  of  the  Church  are  imbued 
with  the  idea  that  Pope  Alexander  VI.,  died 
by  poison,  yet,  as  De  Montor  says  on  the 
authority  of  Novaes,  "no  diary  of  the  time 
mentions  any  such  circumstance."  Alex- 
ander, a  very  old  man,  died  in  his  bed  of 
malignant  fever,  and  the  contrary  reports 
were  unheard  of  until  the  malicious  machi- 
nations of  Luther.* 

Desportes  thus  speaks  of  the  falsely- 
alleged  poisoning  of  Alexander  : 

"The  pretended  circumstances  of  the  death  of 
Alexander  have  excited  no  less  doubt.  Vol. 
taire  himself,  whom  no  one  will  suspect  of 
partiality  in  favor  of  a  Pope,  exclaims,  with 
the  utmost  vehemence,  against  that  assertion 
in  his  dissertation  on  the  death  of  Henri  IV. 
'I  dare  to  say.  to  Guiccardini,'  he  exclaim?, 
'  you  have  deceived  Europe,  and  you  have  de- 
ceived yourself  in  your  own  prejudice  and 
passion.  You  were  the  enemy  of  the  Pope,  and 
you  have  too  easily  credited  your  own  hatred, 
and  the  actions  of  his  life.  No  doubt,  he  took 
at  times  cruel  and  perfidious  revenge  upon 
enemies  no  less  cruel  and  perfidious,'  etc.  Those 
few  words  from  an  historical  discussion,  which 
it  is  needless  to  quote  more  largely,  contain  an 
impartial  judgment  upon  that  part  of  the  life  of 
Alexander." 

Feller  thus  speaks  on  the  same  subject : 

"  Protestants  have  often  taunted  Catholics 
with  the  vices  of  Alexander  VI.,  as  if  the  de- 
pravity of  a  Pontiff  could  render  a  holy  religion 
less  holy  ;  as  if  Christianity  to  be  the  work  of 
God,  must  annihilate  in  its  ministers  the  germs  o 
human  passions.  It  was  not  the  tiara  that  ren- 
dered Alexander  vicious  ;  it  was  his  disposition. 
He  would  have  been  the  same  in  whatever 
sphere  he  moved.  Providence  grants  that  his 
crimes  should  not  disturb  the  Church,  and  that, 
in  these  critical  circumstances,  there  were 
neither  schisms  nor  heresies  to  battle  against. ''f 


A   VINDICATION    OF    SOME    OTHER   TRADUCED 
PONTIFFS.  • 

The  author  whose  bad  book  has  called 
forth  this  volume,  asserts  that  "  no  candid 
historian  will  claim  that  Alexander  VI., 

*De  Montor's  Lives  of  the  Pope*,  p.  642. 
f3ee  Feller's  Hist.  Diet.  I,  p.  112. 


208 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


was  any  worse  than  his  predecessors  Sergius 
III.,  John  X.,  John  XL,  John  XII.,  John 
XVI.,  or  John  XIX.,"  but  as  we  have 
clearly  demonstrated  the  fact  that  Pope 
Alexander  VI.,  was  not  by  any  means  as 
culpable  a  criminal  as  his  enemies  have 
painted  him,  it  stands  to  reason  that  his 
predecessors — whom  prejudiced  writers  have 
charged  with  horrible  crimes  they  never 
committed — were  not  as  bad  as  bigots  and 
bought-up  writers  of  the  past  have  de- 
lineated them. 

The  limits  of  our  book  will  not  permit  of 
any  lengthy  defence  of  the  Pontiffs  who 
stand  charged  with  being  as  guilty  of  crimi- 
nal acts  as  Pope  Alexander,  so  we  will  have 
to  content  ourselves  with  very  briefly  al- 
luding to  each  of  them,  solely  for  the  pur- 
pose of  showing  that  these  Pontiffs  were  far 
from  being  the  bad  men  fanatics  and  falsi- 
fiers have  described  them. 

POPE    SKRGIUS    III. 

It  is  always  prudent  for  both  Catholic 
and  non- Catholic  readers  of  the  biographies 
of  the  Roman  Pontiffs  to  keep  well  in  mind 
the  fact  that  some  authors  who  wrote  lives 
of  the  Popes  were  prompted  to  execute 
that  work  purely  from  malicious  motives, 
so  as  to  misrepresent  their  characters,  other 
writers  merely  copied  what  previous  tra- 
ducers  of  the  successors  of  St.  Peter  had 
written  to  gratify  the  spleen  of  the  public  or 
the  private  enemies  of  the  Vicar  of  Christ. 
Thus  the  world  has  been  filled  with  fraudu- 
lent charges  against  many  of  the  Pontiffs 
which  had  no  foundation  whatever  in  fact, 
and  many  of  which  have,  by  recent  re- 
search, been  proved  to  be  purely  and  pur- 
posely fabulous.  Even  such  Protestants  as 
Hurter  and  Roscoe  have  assisted  in  clear- 
ing up  many  such  calumnies,  and  thereby 
aided  Catholic  historians  like  Rohrbacher, 
Muratori,  Fleury,  De  Montor,  Alzog,  Darras 
and  Artand  in  purging  by-gone  century 
libels  from  the  pages  of  so-called  "  history" 
filled  with  putridity. 

Pope  Sergius  III.  ruled  the  Church  of 
God  from  the  year  905  to  911,  and  here  is 
the  character  given  him  by  three  impartial 
witnesses : 

The  name  of  Sergius  III.,  who  was  recalled 
from  exile  to  fill  the  Chair  of  St.  Peter,  is  one 


of  those  upon  which  the  enemies  of  the  lloly 
See  have  most  delighted  in  heaping  opprobrium. 
On  the  strength  of  Luitprand's  testimony,  bis 
morals  have  been  deeply  calumniated.  The 
name  of  Man  z'a,  wife  of  Adalbert  of  Tuscany, 
a  notorious  character  intimately  connected  with 
all  the  scandals  of  the  day,  is  mentioned  in 
connection  with  these  foul  reports,  perpetrated 
by  shameless  pens.  We  may  quote  contem- 
porary writers  on  the  character  of  Sergins  III. 
"This  Pope,"  says  Flodoard,  "already  pro- 
posed for  the  Sovereign  Pontificate  at  the  time 
of  the  election  of  John  IX.,  was  recalled  amid 
the  unanimous  acclamations  of  the  people,  and 
received  the  consecration  long  since  destined  for 
him.  The  seven  years  of  this  Pontiff's  reign 
were  a  season  of  grateful  joy  to  his  subjects 
throughout  the  world."  Another  contemporary 
author,  John  the  Deacon,  thus  speaks  of  the 
same  Pontiff :  "  After  his  consecration,  Pope 
Sergius  III.,  was  much  grieved  at  the  dilapi- 
dated condition  of  the  Basilica  of  St.  John 
Lateran,  which  had  fallen  into  ruins  at  the  time 
of  Stephen  VI..  and  he  had  recourse  to  the  Di- 
vine Goodness  in  which  he  ever  placid  his  trust. 
He  undertook  to  restore  the  noble  pile  ;  he  hap- 
pily succeeded  in  his  holy  work,  and  adorned  the 
new  basilica  with  the  most  costly  ornaments." 
The  epitaph  inscribed  on  the  Pontiff's  tomb  by 
a  grateful  people  fully  bears  out  the  testimony 
of  Fiodoard  and  John  the  Deacon:  "Return- 
ing from  his  exile  at  the  earnest  prayer  of  the 
people,"  says  this  precious  monument,  "  the 
good  pastor  showed  equal  love  to  all  classes  of 
his  flock,  and  met  all  usurpers  with  apostolic 
energy."  These  three  witnesses,  who  speak  of 
Sergius  as  a  Pontiff  not  only  of  unexceptional 
moral  virtues,  but  full  of  faith,  piety  and  zeal, 
are  contradicted  by  Luitprand's  partial  voice 
alone.  And  so  ill-informed  is  that  hostile  au- 
thor on  this  period  of  history,  that  he  places  the 
Pontificate  of  Sergius  immediately  after  that  cf 
Formosus,  and  ascribes  to  him  the  shocking 
scene  so  disgraceful  to  the  annals  of  Stephen  VI. 
We  believe  that  the  dawn  of  truth  is  now  break- 
ing upon  the  life  of  Sergius,  and  that  history 
has  too  long  been  the  unsuspecting  accomplice  of 
a  partial  and  ill-informed  annalist.* 

It  may  be  well  to  state  here  that  nearly 
all  the  calumnies  circulated  by  the  enemies 
of  the  Church  against  the  Popes  of  the 
tenth  century,  are  copied  from  Luitprandus, 
an  author  concerning  whose  worth  an  emi- 
nent writer  says  : 

Up  to  the  time  that  Baronius  composed  his 
Annals,  the  writings  of  Luitprandus  were  the 
only  source  fiom  which  information  was  to  be 

•Darra*-,  History  of  the  Church,  Vol.  II.,  p. 
561. 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


209 


gathered  as  to  the  Popes  who  lived  during  those 
dark  and  evil  days ;  and  certainly,  as  Luit- 
prand  told  the  story,  nothing  could  be  too  severe 
for  the  Cardinal  to  say  of  Sergius  III.,  or  of  the 
others,  as  of  John  X  ,  for  instance,  whom  he 
similarly  condemns.  But  as  was  natural 
enough,  the  researches  of  Baroniua,  astonishing 
though  they  were,  still  left  a  vast  deal  in  the 
archives  cf  Europe  for  the  industry  of  later  in- 
vestigators, such  as  the  Benedictines  of  St. 
Maur,  and  as  Pagi,  Baluzius,  Muratori  himself, 
and  a  host  of  others,  to  bring  to  light.  The  re- 
sult has  been  that  every  fragment  shedding  ad- 
ditional light  on  the  history  of  the  Popes  of  the 
10th  century  has  revealed  the  injustice  that  had 
been  done  them,  by  those  who  had  too  im- 
plicitly relied  on  Luitprandus  as  an  authority. 
And  certainly,  if  what  this  genius  of  the  most 
profligate  of  the  Dark  Ages  tells  us  of  himself  be 
deserving  of  credit,  his  testimony  is  not  worth  a 
jot  against  any  one  else — much  less  against  the 
Roman  Pontiffs.  Upon  evidence  such  as  his — 
even  if  not  contradicted,  as  it  is  emphatically 
by  witnesses  above  all  suspicion— a  packed  jury 
would  blush  to  bring  in  a  verdict  of  guilty. f 

POPE  JOHN  X. 

This  Pontiff  reigned  from  the  year  914 
to  928,  and  concerning  his  character  a  his- 
torian of  the  Church  says  : 

Lamentable  in  the  extreme  was  the  condition 
of  Rome  and  Italy  at  this  period.  In  the  South, 
the  Saracens,  intrenched  on  the  banks  of  the 
Garigliano,  wasted  the  estates  of  the  Church. 
In  the  North,  the  princes  and  municipal  powers, 
far  from  leaguing  against  the  common  enemy, 
did  but  help  his  ravages  by  domestic  feuds.  The 
state  of  Italy  called  for  a  Pope  who  could  lead 
the  imbittered  spirits  into  the  ways  of  concilia- 
tion and  peace.  John  X.  was  elected  to  the 
Sovereign  Pontificate  (April  30,  A.  D.  914).  He 
*  had  been  nine  years  Archbishop  of  Revenna, 
and  yet  Luitprand  does  not  hetitate  to  state 
that  he  was  transferred  to  the  Sovereign  See  of 
Rome  within  a  year  after  his  appointment  to 
that  of  Ravenna  by  Pope  Lando.  It  is  impor- 
tant to  correct  this  error,  for  upon  it  depends 
an  entire  system  of  accusations  brought  against 
John  X.  Luitprand  himself  confesses  that  he 
gathered  the  facts  alleged  against  the  Pontiff 
from  a  Papular  Life  of  Theodora,  mother  of 
M-»rozia.  The  infamous  character  of  these  in- 
triguing and  abandoned  females  plainly  shows 
that  his  authority  could  have  been  but  a  mere 
pamphlet.  Such  is  the  basis  upon  which  hostile 
historians  have  built  up  all  their  charges  against 
John  X.  Flodoard,  on  the  other  hand,  thus 

fMiley's  History  of  Papal  States,  Vol.  II.,  pp. 
270-1. 


speaks  of  the  same  Pontiff:  "His  prudent  and 
virtuous  life  have  won  for  him  a  throne  in 
Heaven."  The  reader  is  free  to  chose  between 
these  two  contemporaneous  but  contradictory 
statements.  Whatever  may  be  imputed  to  the 
private  individual  whose  name  has  been  made  a 
mark  for  the  lying  calumnies  of  writers  un- 
friendly to  the  Papacy,  the  Pontiff  was  un- 
impeachable, and  the  Church  blesses  the  reign 
of  John  X.* 


POPE  JOHN  XI. 

This  Pontiff  reigned  from  the  year  931  to 
936,  and  a  distinguished  author  says  of  his 
Pontificate : 

John  XL,  was  completely  under  the  contiol 
'of  his  brother  Alberic,  the  "  lyrant  of  Rome," 
and  by  Cardinal  Baronius,  he  is  styled  a  pseudo- 
pontifex.  This  judgment,  however,  was  not  a 
littlo  influenced  by  what  we  have  proved  to 
have  been  the  libellous  story  told  by  Luitprand. 
This  Pontiff  was  the  son  of  Alberic  and  Maroza. 
There  is  no  proof  that  his  election  was  procured 
by  violence,  though  there  is  in  Flodoard  a  hint 
to  that  effect.  By  one  contemporary  he  is 
called  a  Pontiff,  gloriosce  indolis ;  this  however 
mr,y  have  been  said  in  a  spirit  of  adulation. 
Questioned  it  cannot  be,  that  in  his  person,  the 
Apostolic  See  was  completely  enslaved.  "He 
was  stripped  of  all  influence,"  says  Flodoard, 
'•  pushed  back  into  obscurity,  and  restricted  to 
ti.e  mere  ceremonies  of  the  Church."  His  death 
took  place,  A.  D.  936.  He  died  in  captivity,  a 
victim  of  the  ambition  of  his  own  kindred,  f 


POPE   JOHN  XII. 

This  Pontiff  reigned  from  the  year  956  to 
964.  Of  his  character  a  modern  historian 
says : 

I  repeat  what  was  said  of  John  XII.  in  the 
Notizie  of  Rome  for  the  year  1844 : 

"John  XII.,  Conti,  a  Roman,  was  created 
Pope  in  the  year  956,  and  governed  the  Church 
about  eight  years.  During  that  time,  and  in 
the  year  963,  Leo  was  intruded  into  the  Ponti- 
cate.  Being  subsequently  deposed,  he  again 
usurped  the  supreme  dignity  on  the  26th  June, 
964,  and  he  continued  to  retain  his  illegal  pos- 
session of  it  until  April,  965.  Nevertheless,  Leo 
is  reckoned  in  the  list  of  Popes  under  the  name 
of  Leo  VIII." 

After  this  preliminary  official  information,  we 
proceed  to  details.  His  name  was  Octavian, 
and  he  was  the  first  Pontiff  who  changed  his 

*Darras,  History  of  the  Church,  VoL  IL,  p. 
567. 
fDr.  Miley's  Papal  States,  Vol.  II.,  p.  286. 


210 


THE      POPE      AND      IRELAND. 


name.  John  of  the  Couti  family,  grand  nephew 
of  Sergius  III.,  and  of  John  XL,  was  elected, 
or  rather,  at  the  instignation  of  some  Romans, 
intruded  into  the  Papacy  about  the  20th  of 
August,  95G.  He  was  then  only  some  sixteen  or 
eighteen  years  old.  Such  were  the  calamities  of 
the  times,  says  Baronius,  that  it  was  deemed 
hotter  to  tolerate  that  invasion  than  to  wound 
the  Church  by  a  schism  which  would  be  a  worse 
evil  still.  Therefore  the  Church  accepted  and 
endured  him  as  Pontiff,  considering  that  there 
would  be  less  evil  in  tolerating  one  head,  though 
a  monstrous  one,  than  in  afflicting  the  one  body 
with  two  heads.  *  *  *  * 

At  leugth  the  end  of  John's  life  came.  Luit. 
prand,  who  is  hostile  to  John,  bitterly  accuses 
him  ;  but  grave  authors  rightly  refuse  to  admit 
these  latter  accusations.  Rancor  and  prejudice^ 
sometimes  overstep  all  bounds  ;  having  spoken 
truly  on  some  points,  men  sometimes  fancy 
themselves  privileged  to  speak  untruly  on  others. 
Lnitprand  was  the  friend  of  schismatics,  and 
the  flatterer  of  Otho. 

We  shall  close  by  a  reflection  of  Feller's: 
"  The  great  number,"  says  he,  "  of  virtuous  and 
holy  Pontiffs  who  have  occupied  the  See  of 
Rome,  should  make  us  forget  the  small  number 
whose  morals  have  ill  suited  their  station. 
Jesus  Christ  expressly  warns  us  that  the  chiefs 
of  religion  are  not  impeccable,  and  that  their 
faults  are  no  argument  against  the  worship  of 
which  they  are  the  ministers,  or  the  doctrines 
of  which  they  are  the  depositories.  '  The 
Scribes  and  Pharisees  sit  in  the  chair  of  Moses  : 
all  things  whatsoever  they  shall  say  unto  you, 
observe  and  do,  but  according  to  their  works  do 
ye  not."  "—(Matt.  xxiiL,  23). J 

POPE   JOHN  XVI. 

This  Pontiff  reigned  from  the  year  98C  to 
996,  and  against  his  character  we  find  no 
charges  of  any  gravity.  Concerning  his 
Pontificate  a  biographer  of  the  Popes  says  : 

John  XVI.  was  elected  at  the  end  of  Decem- 
ber, 985.  He  was  a  Roman  Priest,  and  the  son 
of  Leo.  Harrassed  by  the  tyrant  Crescentius, 
who,  with  the  title  of  Consul,  occupied  the 
castle  of  Saint  Angelo,  John  fled  into  Tuscany, 
and  appealed  to  Otho  III.  As  soon  as  the  Ro- 
mans learned  the  step  that  the  Pope  had  taken, 
they  recalled  him,  so  much  did  they  dread  Otho. 
The  clergy  reproached  John  with  yielding  to 
that  kind  of  favoritism  which  has  since  been 
known  as  nepotism  ;  in  fact  he  enriched  his  re- 
latives beyond  bounds. 

This  Pope  governed  more  than  ten  years.  He 
waa  illustrious  as  a  cultivator  of  letters,  not- 

£De  Montor's  Lives  of  the  Popes,  Vol.  I.,  pp. 
252-4. 


withstanding  the  rudeness  of  the  time,  and  he  is 
the  reputed  author  of  some  books  on  military 
art.  He  died  on  the  30th  of  April,  996,  and 
was  interred  at  the  Vatican,  in  the  oratory  of 
Saint  Mary.§ 


POPE  JOHN   XIX. 

This  Pontiff  reigned  from  the  year  1003 
to  1009.  Regarding  his  character  De  Mon- 
tor,  in  his  Lives  of  the  Popes,  says  : 

John  XIX.,  surnamed  Fasanus,  was  elected 
in  November,  1003.  He  confirmed  the  institu- 
tion of  the  Bishopric  of  Bamberg,  in  Franconia, 
erected  at  the  desire  of  the  Emperor  Henry. 

Under 'his  Pontificate  concord  was  restored 
between  the  Churches  of  Rome  and  Constanti- 
nople, which  had  been  disunited  in  consequences 
of  the  arrogant  pretensions  of  the  patriarch 
Michael  Cerularius,  who  presumptuously  as- 
sumed the  title  of  oecumenical  and  universal 
Bishop,  which  exclusively  belongs  to  the  Ro- 
man Pontiff.  John  XIX.,  having  forbidden  the 
patriarch  to  usurp  that  title,  the  right  of  Rome 
was  recognized,  and  the  patriarch  Sergius,  in  its 
place,  took  in  the  Dyptics—  i.  e.,  the  tables  of 
the  Church  of  Constantinople— the  title  of  the 
Pope. 

Some  authors  think  that  John  XIX  ,  towards 
the  close  of  his  life,  abdicated  the  Pontificate  to 
retire  to  the  Benedictine  Abbey  of  Saint  Paul, 
at  Rome,  but  modern  critics  do  not  admit  that 
fact.  This  Pope  governed  five  years  and  five 
months  according  to  Novaes,  and  three  years 
and  five  months,  according  to  the  Roman  list. 
It  seems  certain  that  he  died  about  the  year 
1009,  and  that  he  was  interred  at  Saint  John 
Lateran  || 

Such  were  the  Popes  of  the  tenth  century 
whose  characters  have  been  assailed  as  "  the 
very  worst"  in  the  long  line  of  the  successors 
of  St.  Peter  !  Is  there  anything  in  their  * 
lives  which  entitles  them  to  the  maledic- 
tions of  mankind  throughout  the  past  nine 
hundred  years  ?  Compare  their  lives  with 
those  seculars  who  surrounded  them  in  the 
age  in  whjch  they  lived,  and  the  Pontiffs 
will  appear  as  so  many  suns  shining  down 
upon  a  sinful  world  1 

These  Popes,  therefore,  have  been  calum- 
niated. When  the  Church  herself  has  been 
misrepresented,  when  her  dogmas  have  been 
distorted,  when  her  theological  truths  have 
been  traduced,  when  her  very  Sacraments 

§De  Montor's  Lives  of  the  Popes,  Vol.  I.,  pp. 
261-2-3. 

||De  Montor,  Vol.  I.,  pp.  270-271. 


THE      POPE       AND      IRELAND. 


211 


have  been  held  up  as  public  scandals  to  be 
avoided  by  all  decent  intelligent  people— it 
would  be  folly  to  expect  that  those  who  are 
at  the  head  of  the  Church  shou'd  escape 
the  poison-laden  stylus  of  the  hireling,  the 
heretic  and  the  hypocrite. 

And  now  that  we  have  defended  to  the 
best  of  our  ability  the  reputations  of  the  as- 
sailed Pontiff*  from  the  ten  h  to  the  nine- 
teenth century,  the  task  that  we  set  out  to 
accomplish  is  finished. 

The  characters  of  Popes  Adrian  and 
Alexander  have  been  thoroughly  purged 
from  the  calumnies  which  have  been  heaped 
on  them  by  the  falsifying  fictions  of  English 
forgers.  The  documents  which  led  to  the 
traduction  of  these  Vicars  of  Christ  have 
been  thoroughly  and  critically  analyzed 
and  dissected.  After  causing  multitudinous 
controversies  throughout  more  than  seven 
centuries,  it  may  now  be  said  with  some 
degree  of  truth  that  both  these  deceitful 
documents  have  been  thoroughly  exposed 
and  found  to  be  fraudulent  in  their  concep- 
tion, false  in  their  expression,  and  fallacious 
in  their  character. 

But  before  closing  this  page  we  cannot 
fail  to  express  our  joy  that  we  were  able  to 
vindicate  not  only  the  Vicars  of  Christ  from 
the  aspersions  cast  upon  their  character  by 
the  author  whose  fabrications  we  have  fully 
refuted,  but  it  was  also  a  labor  of  love  on 
our  part  to  place  the  fidelity  of  the  Irish 
people  to  Rome  and  their  Catholic  faith  in 


the  true  light  in  which  it  has  always  existed 
and  not  in  the  false  light  in  which  the 
enemies  of  both  the  Church  and  Ireland  de- 
light to  depict  it. 

As  the  renowned  Dr.  James  Doyle,  the 
patriotic  Bishop  of  Kildare  and  Leighlin, 
has  well  and  truly  said  :  "In  Ireland  re- 
ligion has  always  flourished  since  it  was 
first  deposited  in  her  bosom.  It  is  the  only 
country  wherein  the  Christian  faith  was 
planted  which  did  not  involve  the  necessity 
of  sowing  the  Gospel-seed  amid  blood— a 
proof  that  Irishmen  were  naturally  fitted 
for  the  exercise  of  all  the  virtues  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  of  every  moral  and  social  obli- 
gation which  binds  man  in  community. 
We  have  another  great  and  glorious  conso- 
lation :  When  infidelity  reached  our 
shores,  Ireland  shook  the  viper  from  her 
bosom  and  cast  it  into  the  depth  of  the  sea. 
Yes  !  it  were  as  easy  to  strip  the  fields  of 
their  verdure  as  to  deprive  Irishmen  of  the 
fair  religion  of  Christ.  *  *  *  *  It  was 
an  observation  of  Montesquieu,  that  the 
natural  disposition  of  a  people,  as  well  as 
their  social  institutions,  fit  them  for  the  re- 
ception of  Christianity,  or  dispose  them  to 
its  rejection.  We  may  account  our  country 
particularly  blessed,  when  the  Almighty 
Maker  made  us  particularly  disposed  for  the 
practice  of  religion  and  piety.  But  as 
much  has  been  given  to  us— so,  much  is  ex- 
pected from  us ;  it  is  necessary,  therefore, 
that  we  do  good  works  in  a  double  ratio." 


TABLE    OF    CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I.  Page 

Preliminary  Considerations  regarding  the  book  which  called  forth  this  Review  and  Refutation      9 

CHAPTER  II. 

The  Fictitious  Bull  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.— Education  in  Ireland. —The  character  of  Giraldus 

Cambrensis  Analysed  by  Historical  Writers. — Abbe"  MacGeoghegan'a  Criticism 16 

CHAPTER  III. 

Comments  on  the  Character  of  Giraldus  Cambrensis  by  Martin  A.  O'Brennan,  James  J.  Clancy, 
Thomas  Muore  and  Thomas  Mooney 23 

CHAPTER  IV. 

Cardinal  Morau's  able  Historical  Essay  on  the  Fictitious  character  of  the  Bull  attributed  to 

Pope  Adrian  IV 27 

CHAPTER  V. 

A  Historical  contrast  between  the  characters  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  and  King  Henry  II.  of  Eng- 
land. —  The  murder  of  St.  Tnumas  a'Becket,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 35 

CHAPTER  VI. 

The  Bull  attributed  to  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  tested. — Analysis  of  the  Pontificate  of  Pope  Alexan- 
der IET.  —More  Historic*!  errors  refused.  —  L'he  spanou*  Adriaa  Ball  viawed  from  a  ciiucdt 
standpoint 41 

CHAPTER  VII. 

The  Peter  Pence  Proviso  in  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls, — The  false  character  of  the  stipu- 
lation.—King  John's  Surrender  of  England  to  the  Pops. — Important  Document*  relating 
thereto.— Additional  Evidence  of  the  Spurious  character  of  the  Adrian  and  Alexander 
Bulls. — Caustic  ciiticiam  of  Cambrensis  by  the  English  editors  of  his  works 47 

CHAPTER   VIII. 

Proof  that  Giraldus  Cambrensis  knew  that  the  Adrian  Bull  was  a  forged  document. — His  spite- 
ful and  slanderous  Sermon  in  Dublin.— Tne  supposed  "dyaod  ot  Castiel"  critically  analy- 
sed.— More  historical  Mistakes  made  manifest 52 

CHAPTER  IX. 

A  description  of  the  inhabitants  of  Waterford  in  the  Twelfth  century.— The  favorite  abode  of 
Danes,  English  and  other  enemies  ot  Ireland. — The  period  when  the  See  of  Waterford  was 
established.  —  Why  no  Synod  ever  met  there. — Pope  Alexander  and  the  Irish  Bishops. — 
More  Historical  mistakes  corrected 58 

CHAPTER  X. 

The  Synod  of  Windsor  criticised.  — King  Henry's  Treaty  with  the  King  of  Connaught. — The 
Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls  not  known  in  England  in  the  year  1175  — Cardinal  Vivian's 
visit  to  Ireland. — The  right  of  Sanctuary  in  Ireland. — More  malicious  miastatements 
melted  in  the  crucible  of  historic  truth 62 

CHAPTER  XI. 

Strong  evidence  of  English  Chroniclers,  Irish  Historians  and  other  writers,  from  the  Twelfth  to 
the  Nineteenth  Centuries,  against  the  authenticity  of  the  Adrian  Bull.— Opinions  of 
Baronius,  Bzovius,  St.  Antoninus,  Graf  ton,  Plowden,  Bower,  and  others 68 

CHAPTER  XII. 

Continuation  of  the  evidence  of  Historical  Writers  concerning  the  False  character  of  the 
Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls.  —  Absurd  statements  of  English  and  Irish  Historian*. — Ex- 
tracts from  the  writings  of  Abbo  MacGeoghegan,  Father  Thomas  N.  Burke,  Thomas 
Mooney,  Rev.  J.  J.  Brennan.  James  J.  Clancy.  Thomas  Moore,  Monsignor  O'Rielly, 
Geoffrey  Keating,  Charles  O'Kelly.  and  Thomas  Leland 73 


214  TABLE      OF     CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

Additional  Witnesses  in  proof  of  the  Spurious  character  of  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls.  — 
The  Misleading  statements  in  O'Halloran'8  History  diRsecteJ.—  Extracts  from  the  his- 
torical works  of  Hume,  Liu^id,  K<.\.  .1.  Thebaud,  S.  J.,  and  Rev.  W.  £.  Morris  ......  78 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

Jntiiiihic  Evidence  of  the  Fraudulent  character  of  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls.—  A  brief 
analysis  of  the  text  of  each.—  Criticisms  which  prove  their  fictitious  origin.  —  New  light  on 
the  great"Forgery  of  the  Twelfth  Century.  .-s  ____  '  .  v  .....................................  81 

CHAPTER  XV. 

Continuation  of  the  R;I  mo  sut>j--ot.—  More  historical  proof.  —  Was  Ireland  ever  "Christian  only 
in  Name  .'"  —  Te«tiuiouy  01  St.  Bernard.  Thierry,  St.  Columbanus,  Cardinal  Newman,  Arch- 
deacon Lynch,  Gorres,  and  llev.  J.  Cogan  ...............  .  ..............................  90 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

John  of  Salisbury  dissected.—  How  King  Henry  II.  conco<.tod  the  bo^us  "Adrian"  Bull.—  Salis- 
bury's "Metalotficus.  —  Who  wrote  the  Forty-  second  Chapter?  -Strong  proof  that  it  was 
not  the  work  of  John  of  Salisbury  .....................................................  97 

CHAPTER  XVII. 

Further  criticisms  on  the  fictitious  chapter  in  Salisbury's  "Metalogicus."—  Professor  Jung- 
mann's  Judgment.  —  King  Henry's  oath  at  Avranchea.  —  An  insight  into  the  characters  of  the 
two  Popes  to  whom  the  Bulls  are  attributed.—  Pope  Alexander  not  in  Rome  in  1172.  — 
Finding  the  matrix  from  which  Papal  seals  were  forged  ................................  102 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 

Father  Gatquet's  learned  contribution  to  the  "Dublin  Review."—  Severe  strictures  on  the 
chapter  attributed  to  John  of  Salisbury.  —  The  Genuine  Letter  of  Pope  Adrian  on  which 
the  spurious  Bull  was  compiled  ...............................  _._.  .......  ..."  ..............  107 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

English  translation  of  Pope  Adrian's  Letter  to  King  Louis  VII.,  of  France.—  The  Pope's  refus- 
al to  allow  Ireland  to  be  invaded.  —  A  comparison  between  the  wording  of  the  Letter  and 
the  Text  of  the  Spurious  Bull.  —  Reasons  why  the  fraud  was  not  exposed  in  past  centuries.  114 

CHAPTER  XX. 

The  Papal  Court  of  the  Fourteenth  Century  had  no  knowledge  of  the  so-called  Adrian  Bull.  — 
The  Letter  sent  by  Kins:  Edward  of  England  to  Pope  John  XXII.—  Reply  of  that  Pontiff  — 
Letter  from  O'Neill,  King  of  Ulster,  to  Pope  John  XXli.  —  Comments  thereon.  —  Proofs 
that  the  Adrian  Bull  never  originated  in  Rome,  nor  was  iis  genuine  character  ever  admitted 
by  the  Irish  people  ....................................................................  120 

CHAPTER  XXI. 

The  erection  of  Ireland  into  a  Kingdom  by  Pope  Paul  IV.  —  How  English  fraud  accomplished 
that  object.  —  Comments  on  certain  expressions  in  the  Letter  of  Pope  John  XXLI.  — 
Rome's  equal  and  exact  justice  exemplified  —England's  vicious  methods  illustrated  .......  124 

CHAPTER  XXII. 

A  new  and  important  witness  to  the  fradulent  character  of  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls.  — 
Selections  from  the  celebrated  Historical  work  "Cambrensis  E  versus"  by  Dr.  John  Lynch.  — 
Seventeenth  century  evidence  against  both  the  spurious  documents  .......................  127 

CHAPTER  XXIII. 

Further  proof  of  the  spurious  character  of  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls.—  Dr.  Lynch's 
criticisms  on  the  Alexander  Forgery  ...............................................  ....  132 

CHAPTER  XXIV. 

Additional  Extracts  from  "Cambrensis  E  versus."—  Ireland  always  loyal  to  Rome.—  More  proof 
of  the  fraudulent  Forgery  of  the  Adrian  and  Alexander  Bulls  ............................  135 

CHAPTER  XXV. 

Profound  reverence  of  the  People  of  Ireland  for  the  Vicar  of  Christ—  Nearly  every  nation  in 
Europe  placed  under  the  ban  of  the  Church  except  Ireland  ..............................  140 

CHAPTER  XXVI. 

Ireland's  aid  to  Rome  in  the  Propagation  of  the  Faith.—  Irish  Saints  and  Apostolic  Mis- 
sionaries who  helped  to  propagate  Christianity  throughout  every  country  in  Europe  ......  143 


TABLE     OF    CONTENTS.  215 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 

The  Irish  Church  under  the  Popes. — How  the  Holy  Union  was  kept  intact. — List  of  Legates 
sent  from  Home.—  Historical  Errors  corrected  by  Dr.  Lyuch. — That  author's  concluding  re- 
marks in  which  he  shows  up  Cambrensis  in  the  garb  of  a  notorious  calumniator  of  both  the 
Catholic  Church  and  the  Irish  people 147 

CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

Further  historical  proofs  concerning  the  Letter  which  Pope  Adrian  IV.  sent  to  King  Louis 
VII.— Evidence  showing  that  Letter  to  have  alluded  to  Ireland  and  not  to  Spain,  aa 
claimed  by  anti-Catholic  .writers : 152 

CHAPTER  XXIX. 

Criticism  on  the  true  Letter  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  and  the  False  Bull.— Reasons  why  the  Letter 
"  H  "  applies  to  Hibcrnia  and  not  to  Hispania 155 

CHAPTER  XXX. 

What  the  Popes  have  done  for  Ireland. — Help  extended  to  the  Irish  people. — Important 
Historical  facts. — Correspondence  between  Pope  Pius  IX  ,  and  the  Irish  in  Rome. — C/ar- 
dinal  Manning's  tribute  to  Ireland's  Faith 158 

CHAPTER  XXXI. 

The  paternal  love  of  Pope  Leo  XIII.  for  the  Irish  people. — How  public  opinion  was  prejudi- 
ced against  the  Holy  Father— Calumnies  cabled  around  the  world — The  Pope  presented  in 
his  true  character  as  the  Consistent  Friend  of  the  People  of  Ireland  in  their  struggle  for 
National  Independence  by  rightful  means 164 

CHAPTER  XXXII. 

Further  manifestations  of  the  Love  of  Pope  Leo  XIII.  for  the  Irish  people. —Address  of  His 
Holiness  to  the  Irish  Pilgrims  in  Home. — The  Papal  Rescript  of  1888  explained. — Arch- 
bishop Walsh's  Views. — Addresses  of  his  Grace  on  the  Sympathy  of  the  Holy  Father  for 
Ireland. — Opinions  of  Cardinal  Pecci,  Cardinal  Moran,  Bishop  Keane  and  Monsignor 
O'Reilly 170 

CHAPTER  XXXIII. 

Miscellaneous  Historical  Errors  Corrected.— Did  Pope  John  XXII.  Excommunicate  Edward 
Bruce  and  his  adherents?— Was  Maynooth  College  founded  in  order  to  educate  Irish 
Priests  in  the  interests  of  England  ?— Was  the  Repeal  Movement  killed  by  a  Papal  Re- 
script ?— Was  the  Young  Ireland  Movement  killed  by  Irish  Bishops  and  Priests  ? 178 

CHAPTER  XXXIV. 

Secret  Political  Societies. — Their  baneful  influence  upon  Ireland's  Struggles  for  Freedom. 
Reasons  why  the  Church  opposes  them. — The  wisdom  of  her  opposition  proved  by  numer- 
ous examples.— Was  the  Home  Rule  movement  opposed  by  the  Church  ? —Was  the  Land 
League  opposed  by  the  Pope?. — Theee  questions  answered 188 

CHAPTER  XXXV. 

Some  Vicious  Falsehoods  Regarding  "Vatican  Politics"  Fully  Refuted.— The  "Italian  Ring" 
Accounted  for. — The  characters  of  Pope  Alexander  VI.,  and  other  Pontiffs  Triumphantly 
Vindicated. — Conclusion  . . 199 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


^^^^iKS^^jfcjt 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY 


A     001  033  085     0 


